towards a novel unified framework for developing formal, … · 2020-05-04 · i, muaz niazi hereby...
TRANSCRIPT
Towards A Novel Unified Framework for Developing
Formal, Network and Validated Agent-Based
Simulation Models of Complex Adaptive Systems
Computing Science and Mathematics
School of Natural Sciences
University of Stirling
Scotland UK
This thesis has been submitted to the University of Stirling
In partial fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
2011
Name
- ii -
Abstract
Literature on the modeling and simulation of complex adaptive systems (cas) has pri-
marily advanced vertically in different scientific domains with scientists developing a
variety of domain-specific approaches and applications. However, while cas researchers
are inherently interested in an interdisciplinary comparison of models, to the best of our
knowledge, there is currently no single unified framework for facilitating the development,
comparison, communication and validation of models across different scientific domains.
In this thesis, we propose first steps towards such a unified framework using a combination
of agent-based and complex network-based modeling approaches and guidelines formulat-
ed in the form of a set of four levels of usage, which allow multidisciplinary researchers to
adopt a suitable framework level on the basis of available data types, their research study
objectives and expected outcomes, thus allowing them to better plan and conduct their re-
spective research case studies.
Firstly, the complex network modeling level of the proposed framework entails the de-
velopment of appropriate complex network models for the case where interaction data of
cas components is available, with the aim of detecting emergent patterns in the cas under
study. The exploratory agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework allows for
the development of proof-of-concept models for the cas system, primarily for purposes of
exploring feasibility of further research. Descriptive agent-based modeling level of the
proposed framework allows for the use of a formal step-by-step approach for developing
agent-based models coupled with a quantitative complex network and pseudocode-based
specification of the model, which will, in turn, facilitate interdisciplinary cas model com-
parison and knowledge transfer. Finally, the validated agent-based modeling level of the
proposed framework is concerned with the building of in-simulation verification and vali-
dation of agent-based models using a proposed Virtual Overlay Multiagent System
approach for use in a systematic team-oriented approach to developing models. The pro-
posed framework is evaluated and validated using seven detailed case study examples
selected from various scientific domains including ecology, social sciences and a range of
complex adaptive communication networks. The successful case studies demonstrate the
potential of the framework in appealing to multidisciplinary researchers as a methodologi-
cal approach to the modeling and simulation of cas by facilitating effective communication
- iii -
and knowledge transfer across scientific disciplines without the requirement of extensive
learning curves.
- iv -
Declaration
I, Muaz Niazi hereby declare that this work has not been submitted for any other degree
at this University or any other institution and that, except where reference is made to the
work of other authors, the material presented is original. Some portions of the thesis chap-
ters have been published as follows:
• Parts of Chapter 3 in [2], [3].
• Parts of Chapter 4 in [4].
• Parts of Chapter 5 in [5], [6].
• Parts of Chapter 6 in [7-9]. Qasim Siddique helped in some of the simulation
experiments. Some ideas of research simulation were formulated based on ad-
vice from Dr. Saeed Bhatti and Dr. Abdul Rauf Baig.
Muaz Niazi
- v -
Acknowledgements
This thesis would not have been possible without the help and support of a large number of
individuals. First and foremost, I would like to thank my family members, especially my
beloved parents, who have endured my absence during my research and helped me tre-
mendously in all ways possible. Without your continued help, support and guidance, this
would never have been possible. Thank you.
I am deeply indebted to my principal supervisor and founding Head of our COSIPRA
Lab, Dr. Amir Hussain who provided stimulating advice, guidance and encouragement to
me every step of the way. I would like to thank Kamran, Dr. Erfu, Thomas, Rozniza, Erik
and Andrew from the COSIPRA lab. I would also like to thank Kerstin Rosee who, on be-
half of Dr. Amir, would keep me on my toes by requiring regular updates. Writing updates
always pushed me, by forcing me to quantify my progress and obtain critical feedback on a
periodic basis. I would also like to thank Ian MacLellan from the International Office. Fi-
nally, I would especially like to thank my Examiners Dr. Keshav Dahal (from Bradford
University) and Dr. Savitri Maharaj for their constructive criticism and helpful comments,
which helped me considerably in shaping up the thesis in a much better way than I had
originally planned.
- vi -
Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................. ii
Declaration ........................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... v
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................. vi
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... xii
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... xvi
List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ xvii
1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Modeling cas ............................................................................................................ 2
1.2 Motivation ................................................................................................................ 9
1.3 Aims and Objectives .............................................................................................. 10
1.4 Original Contributions ........................................................................................... 11
1.5 Proposed framework for the Modeling and Simulation of cas ............................... 13
1.5.1 Overview of the proposed framework............................................................... 13
1.5.2 Proposed framework levels formulated in terms of cas study objectives ......... 15
1.5.3 Proposed framework levels formulated in relation to available data types ....... 18
1.6 Publications ............................................................................................................ 19
1.6.1 Refereed Conferences and Workshops ................................................................ 19
1.6.2 Published Journal papers ................................................................................... 19
1.7 Overview of the thesis ............................................................................................ 20
1.7.1 Overview of case studies .................................................................................. 20
1.7.2 Outline of the Thesis ......................................................................................... 21
2 Complex Adaptive Systems: Background and Related Work ........................................... 23
2.1 Overview ................................................................................................................ 23
2.2 Complex Adaptive Systems (cas) .......................................................................... 23
2.2.1 The Seven Basics of cas .................................................................................... 26
2.2.2 Emergence 29
2.3 Examples of cas ..................................................................................................... 30
2.3.1 Natural cas example 1: Cas in plants ................................................................ 30
2.3.2 Natural cas example 2: Cas in social systems ................................................... 31
2.3.3 Artificial cas example 1: Complex adaptive communication networks ............ 34
2.3.4 Artificial cas example 2: Simulation of flocking boids ..................................... 36
2.4 Modeling cas .......................................................................................................... 37
- vii -
2.4.1 Complex Network Modeling ............................................................................ 38
2.4.1.1 Complex Network Methods ...................................................................... 39
2.4.1.2 Theoretical basis ........................................................................................ 40
2.4.1.3 Centralities and other Network measures .................................................. 41
2.4.1.4 Software tools for Complex Networks ...................................................... 44
2.4.2 Agent-based Modeling and Agent-based Computing ....................................... 45
2.4.2.1 Agent-Oriented Programming ................................................................... 45
2.4.2.2 Multi-agent oriented Programming ........................................................... 45
2.4.2.3 Agent-based Or Massively multiagent Modeling ...................................... 46
2.4.2.4 Benefits of Agent-based Thinking ............................................................. 47
2.5 A Review of Agent-based Tools ................................................................................... 48
2.5.1 NetLogo Simulation: An overview ................................................................... 48
2.5.2 Overview of NetLogo for Modeling Complex interaction protocols ................ 53
2.5.3 Capabilities in handling a range of input values ............................................... 55
2.5.4 Range of statistics and complex metrics ........................................................... 55
2.6 Verification and Validation of simulation models .................................................. 56
2.6.1 Overview 56
2.6.2 Verification and Validation of ABMs ................................................................ 56
2.6.3 Related work on V&V of ABM ........................................................................ 58
2.7 Overview of communication network simulators .................................................. 58
2.7.1 Simulation of WSNs ......................................................................................... 58
2.7.2 Simulation of P2P networks .............................................................................. 59
2.7.3 Simulation of Robotic Swarms ......................................................................... 59
2.7.4 ABM for complex communication networks simulation .................................. 59
2.8 Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 59
3 Proposed Framework: Complex Network Modeling Level ........................................... 60
3.1 Overview ................................................................................................................ 60
3.2 Generalized Methodology ...................................................................................... 61
3.3 Case Study I: Agent-based Computing .................................................................. 63
3.3.1 Problem Statement ............................................................................................ 64
3.3.2 Methodology ..................................................................................................... 65
3.3.2.1 Data collection........................................................................................... 66
3.3.3 Results ............................................................................................................... 66
3.3.3.1 Network Workbench (NWB) ..................................................................... 68
3.3.3.2 CiteScape ................................................................................................... 70
3.4 Case Study II: Consumer Electronics ..................................................................... 86
3.4.1 Problem Statement ............................................................................................ 86
3.4.2 Methodology ..................................................................................................... 87
- vi -
3.4.3 Results 87
3.5 Summary of results ................................................................................................ 91
3.5.1 Case Study I ...................................................................................................... 92
3.5.2 Case Study II ..................................................................................................... 93
3.6 Broad applicability of the proposed framework level ............................................ 93
3.7 Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 94
4 Proposed Framework: Exploratory Agent-based Modeling Level ................................. 95
4.1 Research Methodology .......................................................................................... 95
4.2 Case Study: Overview, Experimental design and Implementation ........................ 98
4.2.1 Goals definition .............................................................................................. 103
4.2.2 Agent design ................................................................................................... 105
4.2.2.1 Computing device agents ........................................................................ 106
4.2.2.2 Message Agent ........................................................................................ 108
4.2.3 Learning and adaptation in the system ............................................................ 109
4.2.4 Implementation description............................................................................. 110
4.2.4.1 Global variables ....................................................................................... 110
4.2.4.2 Breeds ...................................................................................................... 110
4.2.4.3 Setup ........................................................................................................ 112
4.2.4.4 Make Computing Agents ......................................................................... 113
4.2.4.5 Make Gateway nodes .............................................................................. 113
4.2.4.6 Adjust locations ....................................................................................... 113
4.2.4.7 Searches ................................................................................................... 114
4.2.4.8 Make Search ............................................................................................ 115
4.2.4.9 Make-s-Node ........................................................................................... 115
4.2.4.10 Setup-query ............................................................................................. 115
4.2.4.11 Goals ....................................................................................................... 116
4.2.4.12 Make-Goal ............................................................................................... 116
4.2.4.13 Make-g-Node .......................................................................................... 116
4.2.4.14 Setup-sacs ................................................................................................ 116
4.2.4.15 Setup-sacs-d ............................................................................................ 117
4.2.4.16 Move ....................................................................................................... 119
4.2.4.17 Move-rw .................................................................................................. 119
4.2.4.18 Check-Goal ............................................................................................. 120
4.2.4.19 Move-Devices ......................................................................................... 121
4.3 Simulation Results and discussion ....................................................................... 121
4.3.1 Metrics used .................................................................................................... 122
4.3.1.1 Simulation parameters: ............................................................................ 122
4.3.1.2 Output metrics ......................................................................................... 122
- vii -
4.3.2 Details of experimentation .............................................................................. 123
4.3.2.1 Discussion of results ................................................................................ 125
4.3.3 Discussion of Intelligence in cas Agents ........................................................ 135
4.4 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 136
5 Proposed Framework: Descriptive Agent-based Modeling Level ............................... 137
5.1 Research Methodology ........................................................................................ 141
5.1.1 An overview of DREAM ................................................................................ 142
5.1.2 Design of the Complex Network Model ......................................................... 148
5.1.3 Analysis of the network sub-model ................................................................ 150
5.1.4 Goals of a pseudocode-based specification model.......................................... 152
5.1.5 Templates for the specification model ............................................................ 153
5.2 Case study: Overview, Experimental design and Implementation ....................... 156
5.2.1 Overview 156
5.2.1.1 Problem statement ................................................................................... 157
5.2.2 Agent design ................................................................................................... 158
5.2.2.1 Boid agents .............................................................................................. 159
5.2.2.2 Node agents ............................................................................................. 160
5.2.3 Network Model ............................................................................................... 161
5.2.4 Pseudocode-based specification ...................................................................... 163
5.2.4.1 Agents and Breeds ................................................................................... 163
5.2.4.2 Globals .................................................................................................... 165
5.2.4.3 Procedures ............................................................................................... 166
5.2.5 Experiments .................................................................................................... 173
5.3 Results and Discussion ........................................................................................ 174
5.3.1 Complex Network Analysis of the Network sub-model ................................. 174
5.3.2 Simulation Measurements ............................................................................... 179
5.3.3 Results from Simulation Visualization ............................................................ 180
5.3.4 Quantitative results ......................................................................................... 182
5.3.5 Graphs ............................................................................................................. 184
5.3.6 Significance of findings .................................................................................. 189
5.3.7 Critical Comparison of DREAM with other approaches ................................ 190
5.3.7.1 Template Software approach ................................................................... 190
5.3.7.2 ODD approach......................................................................................... 191
5.4 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 193
6 Proposed Framework: Validated Agent-based Modeling Level ................................... 194
6.1 Problem statement ................................................................................................ 195
6.2 Proposed validate agent-based modeling methodology ....................................... 196
6.2.1 Detailed overview of origins of VOMAS concepts ........................................ 198
- vi -
6.2.1.1 VOMAS basis in Software Engineering Team concepts ......................... 199
6.2.1.2 VOMAS basis in software engineering concepts .................................... 200
6.2.1.3 VOMAS basis in multiagent system concepts ........................................ 202
6.2.2 A Taxonomy of Agent-Based Validation techniques using VOMAS .............. 204
6.3 Case studies: Experimental Design and Implementation ..................................... 206
6.3.1 Case Study I: Ecological modeling of forest fire spread and forest re-growth207
6.3.1.1 Basic simulation Model .......................................................................... 207
6.3.1.2 Advanced Forest Fire model version 1 .................................................... 210
6.3.1.3 Advanced Forest Fire model version 2 .................................................... 212
6.3.1.4 Validation Question ................................................................................. 214
6.3.1.5 Software Contract .................................................................................... 216
6.3.1.6 VOMAS agent design ............................................................................. 216
6.3.2 Case Study II: Environmental Monitoring using Wireless Sensor Networks . 221
6.3.2.1 Validation Question ................................................................................. 223
6.3.2.2 Software Contract .................................................................................... 224
6.3.2.3 VOMAS agent design ............................................................................. 224
6.3.3 Case Study III: Researcher Growth Simulation .............................................. 224
6.3.3.1 Research Process I: Publication .............................................................. 225
6.3.3.2 Research Process II: Citations ................................................................. 226
6.3.3.3 Agent Description ................................................................................... 228
6.3.3.4 Validation Question ................................................................................. 229
6.3.3.5 VOMAS agent design ............................................................................. 230
6.4 Results and Discussion ........................................................................................ 230
6.4.1 Case Study I .................................................................................................... 231
6.4.1.1 Simulation Parameters ............................................................................. 231
6.4.1.2 Validation discussion ............................................................................... 232
6.4.2 Case Study II ................................................................................................... 236
6.4.2.1 Simulation Parameters ............................................................................. 237
6.4.2.2 Validation discussion ............................................................................... 238
6.4.3 Case Study III .................................................................................................. 243
6.4.3.1 Simulation parameters ............................................................................. 243
6.4.3.2 Validation of the representational abilities of TCN models ..................... 244
6.4.3.3 Validation of Hirsch Index Calculation ................................................... 245
6.4.4 Critical comparison of VOMAS with other approaches ................................. 248
6.4.4.1 Empirical Validation ................................................................................... 248
6.4.4.2 Validation using Companion Modeling Approach .................................. 249
6.5 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 250
7 Conclusions and Future Work .............................................................................................. 251
- vii -
7.1 Overview .............................................................................................................. 251
7.2 Research Contributions ........................................................................................ 252
7.2.1 Complex Network Modeling Level for Interaction data ................................. 252
7.2.2 Exploratory agent-based modeling level ......................................................... 253
7.2.3 Descriptive agent-based modeling level ......................................................... 253
7.2.4 Validated agent-based modeling level ............................................................. 254
7.3 Critical review of the proposed levels .................................................................. 255
7.3.1 Critical Comparison of DREAM with other approaches ................................ 255
7.3.1.1 Template Software approach ................................................................... 256
7.3.1.2 ODD approach......................................................................................... 256
7.3.2 Critical comparison of VOMAS with other approaches ................................. 257
7.3.2.1 Empirical Validation ................................................................................... 257
7.3.2.2 Validation using Companion Modeling Approach .................................. 258
7.4 Limitation of the Methods ................................................................................... 258
7.4.1 Limitations and proposed extensions of the framework levels ....................... 259
7.4.2 Selection of Case studies ................................................................................ 259
7.4.3 Selection of Agent-based Modeling Tool ............................................................. 260
7.5 Proposed Future directions .................................................................................. 261
7.6 Final Words .................................................................................................................... 263
Appendix 1 ........................................................................................................................ 264
References ......................................................................................................................... 265
- xii -
List of Figures
Figure 1: An overview of the decision-making process for choosing framework levels in relation to
cas research study objectives .................................................................................................... 17
Figure 2: Data Driven View of Proposed Framework ...................................................................... 18
Figure 3: Peculiar shape and striations in a melon ........................................................................... 27
Figure 4: Tree stem adapting structure temporally ........................................................................... 30
Figure 5: Complex Network model showing different Journals publishing articles related to agent-
based modeling. Bigger caption represents a higher centrality measure explained later in the
chapter ...................................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 6: Artificial Global cas formed by P2P clients observed using utorrent software ................. 36
Figure 7 Code for setup .................................................................................................................... 52
Figure 8 Code for go ........................................................................................................................ 52
Figure 9: Mobile Nodes.................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 10 Proposed Methodology for the complex network modeling level (for the discovery of
emergent patterns based on available interaction data of cas components) ............................. 62
Figure 11: Articles published yearly ................................................................................................. 67
Figure 12: Citations per year ............................................................................................................ 67
Figure 13: Top papers with citations > 20 ........................................................................................ 70
Figure 14: Largest Cluster based on indexing terms ........................................................................ 71
Figure 15: Timeline view of terms and clusters of index terms (based on centrality) also showing
citation bursts ........................................................................................................................... 73
Figure 16: Key Journals based on centrality .................................................................................... 74
Figure 17: Complex network model of the category data ................................................................ 77
Figure 18: Co-Author network visualization.................................................................................... 80
Figure 19: Authors in terms of frequency ........................................................................................ 82
Figure 20: Countries with respect to centrality ................................................................................ 83
Figure 21: Timeline based visualization of institutes ....................................................................... 84
Figure 22: Frequency of papers in Consumer Electronics domain .................................................. 87
Figure 23: Visualization of the citation network of the top Journals of the domain ......................... 88
Figure 24: Network of top papers in Consumer Electronics ............................................................ 89
Figure 25: Co-citation network in Consumer Electronics ................................................................ 91
Figure 26 Exploratory agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework (to assess research
feasibility and proof-of-concept) .............................................................................................. 97
Figure 27: Examples of Internet of Things..................................................................................... 102
- xiii -
Figure 28: Challenges in hybrid network design for Internet of things by using unstructured P2P
algorithms for searching content in personal computing devices ........................................... 103
Figure 29 Establishment of a gradient by SACS sources ............................................................... 104
Figure 30 Query algorithm flowchart ............................................................................................. 105
Figure 31 State chart for Computing device agent ......................................................................... 107
Figure 32: User interface showing various configurable values for the simulation ........................ 111
Figure 33: Description of the setup function ................................................................................... 112
Figure 34: Effects of the execution of the setup function with 2500 computing devices ................ 114
Figure 35: View of the screen after the execution of the setup, Searches and the Goals functions 117
Figure 36: Result of execution of SACS setup algorithm ............................................................... 118
Figure 37 Flowchart for move function. ......................................................................................... 119
Figure 38: Flow chart for the move-rw function ............................................................................ 121
Figure 39: 95% Confidence interval error plot for successful queries plotted against the increasing
sacs-radius .............................................................................................................................. 126
Figure 40: 95% Confidence interval plot for hop count (cost) vs an increase of the SACS-radius
................................................................................................................................................ 127
Figure 41: Scatter graph showing the variation of the cost in terms of hop count with a change in
max-ttl and sacs-radius ........................................................................................................... 129
Figure 42: Mean successful queries with a variation in max-ttl value and a variation in colors based
on different sacs-radius values ............................................................................................... 130
Figure 43: 95% confidence interval plot showing the effects of increasing sacs-radius on the
number of successful queries in the case of node mobility .................................................... 131
Figure 44: 95% confidence interval plot for the cost in terms of hop count with a variation of the
sacs-radius value in mobility of computing devices scenario ................................................ 132
Figure 45: Scatter plot of hop count cost with a variation in max-ttl value color coded according to
sacs-radius in mobility modeling ........................................................................................... 133
Figure 46: Average values of successful queries with respect to a variation in max-ttl value color
coded according to sacs-radius in the case of using mobility modeling ................................ 134
Figure 47: Descriptive agent-based modeling level ....................................................................... 142
Figure 48: An overview of ABM constructs in relation with the specification model constructs .. 144
Figure 49: Pictorial representation of the DREAM Methodology ................................................. 147
Figure 50: Baseline Network template Model of a complete ABM ............................................... 148
Figure 51: State chart diagram for sensor node agents ................................................................... 161
Figure 52: Initial view of imported network .................................................................................. 162
Figure 53: Network view after manipulation algorithms ............................................................... 163
Figure 54: Complex Network Model of Boids and WSN simulation nodes resized and colorized
according to degree centrality ................................................................................................ 175
- xiv -
Figure 55: Plot showing the Degree Centrality .............................................................................. 177
Figure 56: Plot showing the eccentricity centrality ........................................................................ 178
Figure 57: Plot showing the betweenness centrality measure ........................................................ 179
Figure 58:(a) shows unflocked “boids” while (b) shows flocked “boids” and the sensor nodes
sensing the boids, show up as black on the screen. ................................................................ 181
Figure 59: Sensed Motion tracks of “boids” showing emergence of flocking behavior (a) Unflocked
(b) Flocked ............................................................................................................................. 182
Figure 60: 95% Confidence Interval plot of sensed vs. number of boids ...................................... 185
Figure 61: Mean value of sensed over time with different number of boids .................................. 186
Figure 62: 95% Confidence Interval graph of Sensed with a variation in the number of sensors . 187
Figure 63: Mean Sensed value vs. simulation time with a variation in the number of sensors ...... 188
Figure 64: A view of the modeling process, figure adapted from Sargent [203] ............................ 197
Figure 65 Validated agent-based modeling framework level ......................................................... 198
Figure 66: Design and testing of VOMAS Invariants by means of manipulation of the pre-
conditions ............................................................................................................................... 202
Figure 67: Methodology of building In-Simulation Validated ABMs ............................................ 203
Figure 68: A Taxonomy of Agent Based Validation techniques ..................................................... 205
Figure 69: View of the forest before the fire .................................................................................. 209
Figure 70: Forest fire spread .......................................................................................................... 210
Figure 71 Baseline forest fire model with two consecutive fires .................................................... 211
Figure 72 Advanced forest fire model version 1 with tree re-growth ............................................. 212
Figure 73 Advanced forest fire model version 2 with rainfall in part of the forest ........................ 213
Figure 74 Advanced forest fire model version 2 with snowfall effects .......................................... 214
Figure 75: FWI calculation, figure adapted from Wagner[1] ............................................................ 217
Figure 76: WSN network simulation as QUDG with n=200 sensor nodes .................................... 223
Figure 77: Research Process I: Generalized research publication Workflow ................................... 226
Figure 78: TCN with black nodes depicting researchers placed according to their Hirsch index and
blue nodes depicting individual research papers and citations ............................................... 229
Figure 79: Relationship between (a) Fire Intensity and temperature, (b) Probability of fire ignition
and fire fuel moisture code ..................................................................................................... 233
Figure 80: Relation of FFMC with an increase in FWI.................................................................. 234
Figure 81: Tree VOMAS agents detecting fire vs. Fire area .......................................................... 235
Figure 82: Maximum FWI detected by VOMAS tree agents plotted vs. the area of fires ............. 236
Figure 83: Basic simulation model of multi-hop WSN modeled as a QUDG monitoring forest
conditions ............................................................................................................................... 238
Figure 84: WSN monitoring the local environment displaying measured parmeters ..................... 239
Figure 85: Wireless Sensors recording forest temperature and calculating FWI ........................... 240
- xv -
Figure 86: Configuration Options of simulation models of combining Forest Fire simulations with
monitoring simulation by a WSN ........................................................................................... 241
Figure 87: Effects of monitoring large set of fires and FWI value ................................................. 241
Figure 88 :Earliest detection of FWI spike vs. average distance of sensors from fire incident ...... 242
Figure 89 :Simulation view of n = 60 random researchers with max-init-papers = 10 .................. 244
Figure 90: h-Index plot for twenty years for “Victor Lesser” obtained using Publish or Perish
program .................................................................................................................................. 245
Figure 91: a, b Validation exercise 1: Evolution of a researcher’s Hirsch-index (Victor Lesser) ... 246
Figure 92: Validation Exercise 2: Comparison of number of nodes needed to display a author-paper
citation network vs. a TCN for Victor Lesser’s papers. .......................................................... 248
Figure 93: Companion modeling cycle, figure credit: Bousquet and Trébuil [222] ....................... 250
- xvi -
List of Tables
Table 1 Basic Network Analysis of Extracted Paper Citation Network ........................................... 69
Table 2 Top Journals based on Centrality ......................................................................................... 75
Table 3 Core Journals based on frequency ....................................................................................... 76
Table 4 Key categories based on Centrality ..................................................................................... 77
Table 5 Subject Categories according to frequency ......................................................................... 78
Table 6 Key bursts in subject categories .......................................................................................... 79
Table 7 Authors in terms of centrality .............................................................................................. 81
Table 8 Top authors based on frequency .......................................................................................... 82
Table 9 Core Institutes based on frequency ...................................................................................... 85
Table 10 Top Journals in Consumer Electronics .............................................................................. 89
Table 11 Top papers of IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics ............................................. 90
Table 12 Simulation parameters ..................................................................................................... 123
Table 13 SACS varying with constant TTL ................................................................................... 124
Table 14 SACS and TTL varying ................................................................................................... 124
Table 15 SACS vary with constant TTL (mobility) ....................................................................... 125
Table 16 Experiment with TTL and SACS varying (mobility) ...................................................... 125
Table 17 Categorical Sampling of Netlogo-users messages for a recent two weeks period (Aug
2011) ............................................................................................................................................. 139
Table 18 Table showing the format for creation of complex network using Cytoscape ................. 151
Table 19 Table of Eccentricity, Betweenness and Degree Centrality measures of the complex
network ................................................................................................................................... 175
Table 20 Descriptive Statistics of vary-boids experiment .............................................................. 183
Table 21 Descriptive statistics of experiment vary-sensors ............................................................ 183
Table 22 Table of Fire Danger Index values ................................................................................... 234
Table 23 Data for validation. Calc hI = Calculated h-Index and h-Index is the h-Index from Publish
or Perish software which obtains data via Google Scholar (Current as of July, 2011) ........... 247
- xvii -
List of Abbreviations
ABM Agent-based Model
CNA Complex Network Analysis
ABC Agent-based Computing
MAS Multiagent System
VOMAS Virtual Overlay Multiagent System
SECAS Sensing Emergence in Complex Adaptive Systems
CAS or cas Complex Adaptive System
SME Subject Matter Expert
SS Simulation Specialist
UML Unified Modeling Language
V&V Verification and Validation
WSN Wireless Sensor Network
CSN Cognitive Sensor Network
P2P Peer to Peer
MANET Mobile Ad-hoc Networks
MASON Multi-agent Simulator of neighborhoods/ networks
JADE Java Agent Development Framework
WOS Web of Science
JCR Journal Citation Reports
LISP List Processing (Language)
- 1 -
1 Introduction
“Framework: A structure composed of parts framed together, esp. one designed for inclos-
ing or supporting anything; a frame or skeleton.” - Oxford English Dictionary
Complex adaptive systems (cas) [10] is a set of special type of natural and artificial
complex systems. It is representative of the notion of a system where “The whole is more
than the parts”. In other words, these are systems where numerous and perhaps quite sim-
ple components interact in a nonlinear fashion to give rise to global unprecedented and
often unpredictable behaviors visible and detectable at a higher level of abstraction. Phe-
nomena and mechanisms associated with cas include “emergence”1, self-organization[11]
and self-assembly[12]. These phenomena are typically observable and comprehensible by
intelligent observers at higher levels of abstraction[13] but not easily quantifiable at the
micro level. At times, while emergent patterns have been noted to be both interesting as
well as unprecedented, it has been observed by cas researchers that there is no known way
of predicting these patterns based solely on an understanding of the individual components.
Thus, an understanding of the individual components of a cas is not enough to develop an
understanding of the entire system [14] because it is the actual interactions of the compo-
nents which plays a key role in the observed global behaviors.
With a strong presence and association with the natural sciences from the physical
world, cas are well-known to transgress disciplinary boundaries. Therefore, it is quite
common to find an interest in different types of cas as demonstrated by the existence of a
large number and variety of models in literature. Multidisciplinary researchers from a wide
1 According to the Oxford Dictionary, the earliest use of the term emergence dates back to 1755 by Brooke
University “Beauty i. 10 From the deep thy [Venus'] bright emergence sprung.” And formally defined as
“The process of coming forth, issuing from concealment, obscurity, or confinement. lit. and fig. (Cf. emerge
v. 3, 4.) Also said of the result of an evolutionary process”
- 2 -
and diverse set of backgrounds ranging from social sciences, ecological sciences, computa-
tional economics, system biology and others have been studying cas and related
phenomena. However, a study of this complex behavior can typically turn out to be a non-
trivial exercise; firstly because a research study can involve a set of extensive data collec-
tion exercises coupled with model development exercises for the cas components as well
as interactions. Subsequently these models need to be correlated with their observed data to
develop an understanding of the underlying dynamics of the cas system under study.
Technically, developing an understanding of a cas is associated with the formation of
“explicit” models of the system. While “implicit” models are of a mental cognitive
nature[15], “explicit” models are more effective for communication[16].
In terms of effort and commitment, these models can range from exploratory, requiring
a small time to develop, to inquisitory, requiring perhaps man-years of effort and resources.
These projects can also range from smaller to larger teams with different team structures of
personnel for gathering real-world data and for developing agent-based or complex net-
work-based models of various aspects of the system of interest. While cas researchers
conduct research in parallel disciplines and have an inherent interest in examining, com-
paring and contrasting models across disciplines, currently such comparisons are
performed informally. As such, to the best of our knowledge, there is no unified framework
for the multidisciplinary modeling and simulation of cas. As such, most researchers resort
to either performing informal comparisons[17] or else evolving domain-specific methods
of developing models[18-22].
1.1 Modeling cas
Epstein defines modeling as the development of a “simplified” representation of “some-
thing”. Epstein also clarifies misconceptions about modeling and simulation giving a list of
- 3 -
different reasons for modeling [16]. He notes that modeling can be “implicit” (a mental
model), in which case, “assumptions are hidden, internal consistency is untested, logical
consequences and relation to data are unknown”. Thus these types of models are not effec-
tive in the communication of ideas. The alternative is “explicit” models, which are more
effective in communicating ideas and concepts associated with the model. In “explicit”
models, the assumptions are carefully laid out and are coupled with details such as the out-
comes of the modeling exercise. Another important feature of developing explicit models
is that these models facilitate the replication of results obtained from the model by the sci-
entific community.
For any cas, the ability to come up with explicit models thus demonstrates the attain-
ment of a level of understanding. Although cas are extremely commonplace since all living
systems themselves tend to be cas at several levels of hierarchy, they do not surrender
themselves easily to modeling. As such, in the absence of a single comprehensive frame-
work governing various aspects of modeling and simulation of cas, these systems have
more or less been loosely modeled using a number of different paradigms with closely re-
lated roots. While most initial modeling of complex systems has traditionally been used
with the goal of simplification[23] such as using differential equations, system dynamics or
Monte Carlo simulations, more recently multidisciplinary literature has noted[24] a prefer-
ence of cas researchers to the use of one of the two modeling approaches as follows :
1. Agent-based (or Individual-based) modeling approaches[25].
2. Complex network-based approaches[26].
To specifically comprehend the cas modeling problem, a closer examination reveals that
the development of a unified framework for modeling cas would entail answering several
- 4 -
open research questions. These questions, ordered from the less abstract to the more ab-
stract, can be phrased as follows:
1. How to better develop models of interaction data?
2. How to describe cas to facilitate communication across scientific and disciplinary
boundaries?
3. In the case of a dearth of real-world data, how can cas simulation models be vali-
dated primarily using meta-data or concepts?
4. In general, how can multidisciplinary cas research projects be structured and exe-
cuted based on availability of resources and commitment?
Next, these four questions are examined in further detail.
1. How to better develop models of interaction data?
As part of a search for suitable data for cas modeling research, it is common to first
discover that while there are a considerable number of existing data sources, not many of
them might be useful for modeling. One key problem lies in the fact that most available
data typically consists of statistical summarized data, which is often not very helpful in de-
veloping models of the exact nature of the underlying dynamics in cas [27]. This approach
does not give sufficient details to develop more advanced data-driven models. As such, cas
researchers need to figure out exactly how to structure their data collection exercise during
their case study to be able to come up with models which actually give some useful infor-
mation.
A particularly useful paradigm for developing models of interaction data is the Com-
plex Networks Analysis (CNA) approach. Complex networks are an extensions of the
traditional graphs[28]. The idea is to use interactions and other relationships of various as-
- 5 -
pects and components in cas to develop network models. Once the network models have
been developed, cas researchers can use network manipulation to extract useful quantita-
tive as well as visual information about the topological structure of the system. Networks
can be trimmed and particular types of nodes or links can be manipulated to highlight use-
ful visual information about the topological aspects of the cas. In addition, various
quantitative measures such as network diameter, clustering coefficients, matching indices
and various centrality measures such as eccentricity, betweenness, degree etc. can be calcu-
lated for the network. These measurements allow making recommendations such as
classification of a particular type of network (Such as small-World, Scale-Free or Random
network models) or else for highlighting important components or interactions inside the
cas.
While there are numerous available software tools for developing complex network
models, selecting the right type and quantity of data can pose as a difficult research chal-
lenge. Currently this is not an automatic process and thus existing data mining techniques
cannot be directly applied to implicitly select important data from large number of data
types and columns. Specifically what cas researchers might be looking for, are specific as-
pects of cas, tied closely with emergence and other complex phenomena.
Taking a specific example of biological networks, currently a large amount of data
sources are available in online repositories such as nucleic acid sequences and bioinformat-
ics analysis clusters which can be used to execute complex algorithms. However, to
actually develop networks, cas researchers have to first understand and develop an implicit
mental model of exactly what should be a suitable node (e.g. a gene) and what would con-
stitute a suitable link (e.g. co-expression) to ensure that the resulting network is useful for
their domain. Some of these networks can themselves be quite complex and hierarchically
structured. An example of these is the gene regulatory networks, which are themselves
- 6 -
well-known as a system consisting of many sub-networks[29]. Other examples include
protein interaction networks which are developed based on protein molecules in undirected
graphs, signal transduction networks which are directed networks demonstrating various
biochemical reactions and social networks such as friendship networks where the weighted
links depend upon the perceived level of friendship of the subjects (persons) involved in
the study[30] etc.
2. How to describe cas to facilitate communication across scientific and disciplinary
boundaries?
Multidisciplinary researchers exploring cas can come from a variety of possible back-
grounds. While they are experts in their subject and can have significant domain
knowledge, it is possible that they might not be comfortable with the nomenclature fol-
lowed by other disciplines. As such, to describe cas, there needs to be a common easily
accessible description format which ties in closely with the cas model but is not specific to
a particular cas scientific discipline. While it should not be highly technical, it should still
allow the construction of descriptive models which should be comparable across case stud-
ies and disciplines. There are many inherent benefits of having such a description; firstly it
would allow for a comparative study of cas models across scientific disciplines and do-
mains. Secondly, it would allow high fidelity of simulation models with the specification
models. Thirdly, it can be used for learning cas concepts from models of other domains.
3. In the case of a dearth of real-world data, how can cas simulation models be validated
primarily using meta-data or concepts?
Being able to develop simulation models of cas is one thing and being able to validate
them is another. Unlike traditional simulation models, the concepts related to cas are typi-
cally quite abstract in nature and not easy to describe verbally. While researchers have
attempted to describe some aspects of a cas, it has traditionally been quite difficult to give
- 7 -
generalized definitions of cas concepts such as emergence or self-organization etc. using
terms globally acceptable by all disciplines. As such, the acceptability of the results of any
cas simulation model is tied closely with how valid these results appear to the researchers.
While for social scientists, models might be considered valid if the results of a simulation
appear similar to what they observe from population studies, for biologists, simulation
models might need a much higher level of fidelity with the actual components of the sys-
tem such as bio-chemical molecules etc. As such, what might seem valid to scientists from
one discipline might not be an acceptable validation for another set of scientists from an-
other discipline. As such, validation needs to be customizable. The problem with this
approach is that currently developing validation can be a fairly nontrivial exercise and
there is currently no way of structure the efforts of the Subject Matter Experts (SME) and
the Simulation Specialists (SS). As such, validation of cas simulation models varies from
case study to another without any basic common validation techniques unlike more tradi-
tional simulation models of complicated systems. These engineered systems are often
better describable in terms of mathematical equations and mostly lend themselves better to
generating suitable data for validation of models.
Another problem associated with validation of cas models is that at times, instead of be-
ing able to validate using data, the validation of complex concepts and emergent behavior
of the cas under study is required so as to ensure that the simulated system behaves close
enough to the cas being modeled. Such behavior is typically hard to put in an explicit mod-
el. Traditional validation techniques being typically data-driven either use various
attributes from the results of a simulation model and compare them with “actual” results
from the systems of interest or compare the results with another model. In the absence of
either of these, SS need to rely on “Turing or face validation”[31], where the observer
compares output of the model visually based on previous experience with the system. In a
- 8 -
cas modeling scenario, at times, it can be difficult to acquire the exact data required for
validation and thus, even though there might be some data, it might not always be a good
candidate for traditional validation schemes. In other words, some points regarding valida-
tion of simulation models of cas can be noted as follows:
a. Cas are extremely interactive in nature. A simple change in the composition can
massively change the global behavior. Having aggregate data in the form of
purely statistical tables might not be a real representation of the actual cas and
might only represent a certain propagation of states of the cas. If validation
were performed similar to traditional simulation models, it might not be valid
itself technically as it is similar to taking a zoomed picture of a bird’s yellow
beak in a simulation and validating it with a yellow life jacket simply because
the colors match. Thus, even if the “graphs” or “plots” appear to coincide, the
actual models may be totally different and technically speaking, the validation
would not be valid by itself.
b. Secondly, validation of cas is tied closely with the interaction (run-time behav-
ior) of the various “agents” inside the model and not just the output data. For a
good cas validation scheme, this important fact needs to be taken into consider-
ation.
4. In general, how can multidisciplinary cas research projects be structured and executed
based on availability of resources and commitment?
Cas researchers develop models in a number of different ways, with numerous goals
and for various cas aspects [32]. One problem very often faced by researchers (as can be
observed on agent-based modeling mailing lists such as netlogo-users and repast) is when
researchers are planning research on cas but there is currently no clear way of identifying
- 9 -
which types of models to develop or how to move further, based on the expected outcomes
of the research. As such, researchers can find it difficult to structure their time and resource
commitments to better develop cas research projects. Occasionally, researchers might have
a few days to develop models to demonstrate future feasibility. Subsequently, if they suc-
ceed in this phase and are able to secure funding for further research, they might have
access to more resources to perform modeling and data collection exercises with a larger
team.
To the best of our knowledge, there is no existing multidisciplinary framework allow-
ing the structuring of cas case studies and model selection based on commitment levels or
goals in addition to allowing a combination of complex network and agent-based modeling
methods for multidisciplinary cas researchers. Having such a single unified framework for
multidisciplinary cas research would thus assist considerably in developing and communi-
cating cas models across scientific disciplines and structuring cas research projects.
1.2 Motivation
As noted in the previous section, there are several open questions associated with de-
veloping various types of “explicit” cas models. The key problem here is the
multidisciplinary nature of cas systems. Researchers from diverse backgrounds such as
Life Sciences, Social Sciences and Communication Engineers need to work with cas. As
such, there is neither a common methodology nor a set of concrete guidelines for develop-
ing cas models spanning multiple scientific disciplines. Researchers can be unaware of
exactly how to proceed and what to expect when developing cas models. In addition, this
problem is compounded by the fact that most cas researchers are non-specialist in Comput-
er Sciences and therefore in spite of being experts in their particular domains, they can tend
to be neither interested in nor are often able to develop advanced highly technical models.
However, it can be noted from an examination of multidisciplinary cas literature that they
- 10 -
still feel comfortable developing various types of explicit models with visual components
(such as agent-based and complex network-based models).
This thesis has been motivated by the lack of a single unified framework for the model-
ing of complex adaptive systems. Although many different models have previously been
developed for various types of cas, in general, cas modeling has evolved vertically with
little cross-flow of ideas between various application domains. As such, although there are
numerous examples of applied modeling and simulation in literature, to the best of our
knowledge, there does not exist a common guiding framework for interested multidiscipli-
nary cas researchers providing concrete guidance on how to approach cas problems, how to
develop different types of models and how to decide which type of data would be most
suitable for developing models, how to describe simulation models with a high fidelity to
the actual model, how to develop model descriptions allowing for visual and quantitative
comparisons of models and last, but not the least, how to structure validation studies of cas
simulations. Such a framework might also assist in the removal of ambiguities in the usage
of terms associated with cas nomenclature2 prevalent due to a parallel evolution of model-
ing practices in different scientific disciplines, enabling different cas models from different
case studies and scientific disciplines to be comparable with each other.
1.3 Aims and Objectives
The aim of this research is to work towards a set of unified framework guidelines allow-
ing researchers interested in multidisciplinary and inter-disciplinary cas studies to explore
the development of explicit models of cas by using a combination of complex network and
agent-based modeling approaches based on their research goals and level of commitment.
2 Examples include the terms individual-based modeling, agent-based modeling and multiagent systems.
More details are given in Chapters 2 and 3.
- 11 -
1.4 Original Contributions
Original research conducted and reported in this thesis is aimed at developing first steps
towards a unified framework in the form of concrete guidelines coupled with detailed case
study examples for use by multidisciplinary cas researchers. Some of the key original con-
tributions in the modeling and simulation of cas are summarized as follows:
A. The key contribution is a unified framework allowing multidisciplinary researchers
to plan their cas research case studies formulated based on levels of research goals
and commitment. The proposed framework uses a combination of agent-based and
complex network models to allow for interaction-based, exploratory, descriptive
and validated models of cas.
B. The proposed framework is structured in the form of different levels composed of a
set of methodological guidelines. Each of the framework levels allows the planning
and execution of a specific type of cas research study based on the availability and
type of data, the objectives of the case study and the expected levels of commit-
ment.
C. The first two levels of the proposed framework are structured specifically to en-
compass existing modeling and simulation research which mainly uses complex
network and agent-based simulation modeling techniques whereas the rest of the
two framework levels allow for more advanced model development using a combi-
nation of these approaches.
D. The complex network modeling level of the proposed framework is structured and
linked with the availability of suitable interaction data from cas components. Using
interaction data, complex network models can thus be developed for cas explora-
tion. These models can be manipulated and subsequently visualized using various
- 12 -
mathematical and software tools giving qualitative as well as quantitative inference
capability to the cas researchers.
E. Using the exploratory agent-based modeling level, researchers can use agent-based
modeling as an exploratory tool to develop proof-of-concept cas models to explore
feasibility of future research thus paving the way for more sophisticated techniques.
F. The descriptive agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework is useful for
researchers who are primarily interested in cross-disciplinary communication and
comparison of models. Descriptive modeling approach is being proposed which us-
es a combination of pseduocode-based specification and complex network
modeling as a means of modeling agent-based models. There are several benefits of
this approach; firstly it allows the description of cas models in a way such that there
is a high degree of fidelity of the model with the ABM. Secondly, it allows for
quantitative, visual and non-code based comparison of cas models developed in
multiple disciplines. Thirdly, it allows the exploitation of learning opportunities for
researchers by allowing the examination of models across scientific disciplines thus
facilitating the creation of heterogeneous multi-domain ABMs.
G. The validated agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework is based on a
step-by-step methodology for the development of in-simulation validation for
agent-based models by means of an interactive collaborative effort involving both
Subject Matter Experts (SME) as well as the Simulation Specialists (SS). This ap-
proach is based on concepts from multiagent systems, software engineering and
social sciences. Using a systematic approach, the outcome of the methodology is an
agent-based model of the cas validated by means of design-by-contract invariants
in the simulation model where the contract is enforced by means of in-simulation
- 13 -
cooperative agents termed as the Virtual Overlay Multiagent System (VOMAS).
Building a VOMAS allows SME and SS to collaboratively develop custom in-
simulation verification and validation schemes for the cas application case study.
H. The viability of the proposed framework is demonstrated with the help of various
case studies spanning different individual scientific disciplines and some case stud-
ies spanning multiple scientific disciplines.
1.5 Proposed framework for the Modeling and Simulation of cas
In this section, firstly an overview of the proposed framework is presented. Next the
framework is described from two different perspectives firstly in terms of study objectives
of conducting a cas research case study and the expected level of commitment. Secondly,
the framework is described in correlation with the availability and access to specific data
types.
1.5.1 Overview of the proposed framework
For the sake of practicality, the framework guidelines have been developed in the form
of levels of abstraction. Thus, cas researchers can opt for modeling at a particular level de-
pending on factors such as availability of data, meta-data as well as the level of interest and
how much time cas researchers can invest in pursuing a research project. In addition, ex-
ample case studies are presented to demonstrate the usage of various framework levels.
Based on the proposed framework, research in cas can be conducted by choosing and sub-
sequently following one of the following four proposed levels for developing cas models:
• The complex network modeling level of the framework is useful if interaction data is
readily available. In this level, complex network models of cas can be developed using
this interaction data and subsequently Complex Network Analysis (CNA) can be per-
- 14 -
formed for network classification as well as determination of various global and local
quantitative measures from the network for the extraction of useful information. Such
information can give details of emergent behavior and patterns which would otherwise
have not been evident using statistical or other more traditional mathematical methods.
• The exploratory agent-based modeling level of the framework extends existing ideas of
agent-based modeling prevalent in multidisciplinary literature which focus on the de-
velopment of exploratory agent-based models of cas to examine and extricate possible
emergent trends in the cas. Building exploratory models allows cas researchers to de-
velop experimental models which help lay foundation for further research. These
proof-of-concept models also assist researchers in determining the feasibility of future
research in the domain using the selected model design.
• Developing models at the descriptive agent-based modeling level of the framework en-
tails developing concrete DescRiptivE Agent-based Models (DREAM) by using a
combination of pseudocode-based specification, a complex network model and a quan-
titative model “fingerprint” based on centrality measures of the agent-based model
which are all associated closely with the ABM. The pseudocode-based specification is
developed in the form of non-code template schemas and has several benefits; firstly it
is close to an executable specification but is not tied with any single programming lan-
guage thus allowing use by cas researchers for developing agent-based models based
on the specification using tools of their own liking. Secondly, this specific type of spec-
ification allows a one-to-one correspondence of ABM concepts with the descriptive
model. Thirdly this specification allows communication and comparison of models in
multidisciplinary studies by using visual as well as quantitative methods.
• The validated agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework is concerned
with developing verified and validated agent-based models. This level allows perform-
- 15 -
ing in-simulation verification and validation of the agent-based models using a Virtual
Overlay Multiagent System (VOMAS) based on a cooperative set of agents inside the
simulation allowing the verification and validation of the cas model by means of de-
sign-by-contract invariants. These invariants are developed as a result of collaboration
of the Subject Matter Expert (SME) and the Simulation Specialist (SS). In this level,
concepts originating from software engineering, multiagent Systems and social scienc-
es are all used in tandem to propose a systematic methodology for ABM verification
and validation.
1.5.2 Proposed framework levels formulated in terms of cas study objectives
In Figure 1, it can be noted how different framework levels can be used by multidisci-
plinary cas researchers to develop models based on their particular study objectives and
expected outcomes.
If there is sufficient interaction data available then the cas research study can proceed by
using the complex network modeling level of the proposed framework. In this level, re-
searchers first analyze the data columns, extract suitable data, develop complex network
models and subsequently perform network manipulation and complex network analysis for
the discovery of emergent patterns.
However, as is often the case, if such data is unavailable and the goal of the research
study is to determine the feasibility of future research, then it might be possible to feasible
to proceed in their research study by using the exploratory ABM level of the proposed
framework.
These two framework levels essentially can also be used to encompass existing cas re-
search studies which have primarily used either complex network modeling and analysis or
else agent-based modeling or both in their analyses.
- 16 -
If however, the goal of the research is to perform an inter-disciplinary comparative case
study then the descriptive agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework allowing
for developing a DREAM model can be chosen. This particular framework level has the
benefit of allowing for inter-disciplinary model comparison, knowledge transfer and learn-
ing.
Finally, if the goal of the study is develop simulations with a high degree of correlation
with real-world systems such as in the development of decision support systems, then the
appropriate framework level for usage would be the validated agent-based modeling level
based on the development of an in-simulation validation scheme using the VOMAS ap-
proach. This framework level is also more suitable for large-scale team oriented projects
and requires adherence to team-oriented protocols with the goal of a verified and validated
agent-based model of the cas system under study.
- 17 -
Figure 1: An overview of the decision-making process for choosing framework levels in relation to cas
research study objectives
- 18 -
Complex Network
Modeling level
cas knowledge
ABM
development Descriptive
ABM
development Interaction Data
Validated ABM
development
1.5.3 Proposed framework levels formulated in relation to available data types
In the previous section, an overview of the different framework levels in relation to the
cas research study objectives. Here, in this section, we shall describe the framework in
terms of available data or knowledge about the cas. As we can note from Figure 2, a de-
scriptive specification of the cas model can be developed based on the metadata or
knowledge about the cas. An ABM can be developed either from this specification or di-
rectly from the knowledge of cas. The ABM can be verified and validated using in-
simulation validation (which has been developed as a result of extensive meetings between
SMEs and SSs) that is performed by building a VOMAS model. By the help of invariant
constraints enforced by the cooperative agents forming the VOMAS, the simulation can be
verified and validated using in-simulation methods. In addition, if interaction data is avail-
able for the development of network models, complex network models can be developed
and CNA can be used to manipulate and analyze various structural topological features of
the interactions using various information visualization-based and mathematical tools.
Figure 2: Data Driven View of Proposed Framework
- 19 -
1.6 Publications
Some parts of the chapters in this thesis have been published in various peer-reviewed
venues. Because of the peculiar inter-disciplinary nature of cas research, some of the work
performed was in collaboration with different researchers and the specific contributions of
the co-authors have been noted earlier in the declaration at the start of the thesis.
1.6.1 Refereed Conferences and Workshops
1. Niazi MA, Hussain A. Social Network Analysis of trends in the consumer electron-
ics domain. In: Proc Consumer Electronics (ICCE), 2011 IEEE International
Conference on, Las Vegas, NV, 9-12 Jan. 2011, 2011. pp 219-220. (Chapter 3)
2. Niazi MA, Hussain A, Baig AR, Bhatti S. Simulation of the research process. 40th
Conference on Winter Simulation. Miami, FL: Winter Simulation Conference;
2008. pp 1326-1334. (Chapter 6)
3. Niazi MA, Hussain A, Kolberg M. Verification &Validation of Agent Based Simu-
lations using the VOMAS (Virtual Overlay Multi-agent System) approach.
MAS&S 09 at Multi-Agent Logics, Languages, and Organisations Federated
Workshops. Torino, Italy; 2009. pp 1-7. (Chapter 6)
4. Niazi MA, Siddique Q, Hussain A, Kolberg M. Verification and Validation of an
Agent-Based Forest Fire Simulation Model. SCS Spring Simulation Conference.
Orlando, FL, USA: ACM; 2010. pp 142-149. (Chapter 6)
1.6.2 Published Journal papers
1. Niazi MA, Hussain A. Agent-based Computing from Multi-agent Systems to
Agent-Based Models: A Visual Survey. Springer Scientometrics 2011;In-
press.(Chapter 3)
- 20 -
2. Niazi MA, Hussain A. Agent based Tools for Modeling and Simulation of Self-
Organization in Peer-to-Peer, Ad-Hoc and other Complex Networks. IEEE Com-
munications Magazine 2009; 47(3):163 - 173. (Chapter 4)
3. Niazi MA, Hussain A. A Novel Agent-Based Simulation Framework for Sensing in
Complex Adaptive Environments. IEEE Sensors Journal 2011; 11(2):404-412.
(Chapter 5)
4. Niazi MA, Hussain A. Sensing Emergence in Complex Systems. IEEE Sensors
Journal 2011; 11(10): 2479-2480. (Chapter 5)
1.7 Overview of the thesis
Here, first an overview of the different explored case studies is provided. This is fol-
lowed by an overview of the chapters.
1.7.1 Overview of case studies
To ensure that the research was in line with the norms of various cas, we have
worked in tandem with teams of cas researchers and domain experts from life sciences,
social sciences and telecommunications. The following list gives details of some of the
case studies discussed in the thesis as a means of examples of the application of the pro-
posed methods associated with various levels of framework along in correlation with the
thesis chapters:
- In chapter 3, the proposed framework level is applied on two different case studies in
the domain of scientometric data of agent-based computing and consumer electronics
domains.
- In chapter 4, a comprehensive case study on the use of unstructured search algorithms
from the domain of P2P networks in the domain of “Cyber-physical systems”[33] by
the development of an “Internet of things”[34] has been presented.
- 21 -
- In chapter 5 a case study on the development of a heterogeneous ABM of sensing sin-
gle-hop Wireless Sensor Network for sensing complex behaviors of flocking “boids” is
presented.
- In chapter 6, three different case studies are presented. The first case study is in the
domain of ecological modeling and models forest fire simulations. The second is in the
domain of multi-hop Wireless Sensor Networks modeled in the form of a Quasi Unit
Disk Graph (QUDG). The third case study is in the domain of simulation of the evolu-
tion of researchers on the basis of their Hirsch index.
1.7.2 Outline of the Thesis
The rest of the thesis is organized as follows:
Chapter 2: This chapter presents background and related work required to com-
prehend the rest of the thesis.
Chapter 3: This chapter presents complex network modeling level of the proposed
framework. These methods are further applied to two different domains; Agent-based
Computing and Consumer Electronics. The first case study is given in considerable detail
and various Scientometric indicators such as key papers, important authors, highly cited
Institutions, key journals and a number of other indicators are identified using complex
network modeling. The second case study is given as a means of validation of the proposed
methods in another separate domain and identifies key Journals, authors and research pa-
pers from the consumer electronics domain.
Chapter 4: This chapter presents exploratory Agent-based modeling level of the
proposed framework. As a demonstration of the proposed methods, a comprehensive ex-
ploratory agent-based model in the domain of Cyber-Physical Systems is developed
- 22 -
demonstrating a combination of unstructured P2P search methods to locate content in static
and mobile physical computing devices.
Chapter 5: In this chapter, descriptive agent-based modeling level of the proposed
framework is presented. Descriptive modeling entails the development of a DescRiptivE
Agent-Based Modeling (DREAM) model by using a combination of a complex network
model, a quantitative centrality-based fingerprint and a pseudocode-based specification
model with a high degree of fidelity with the actual agent-based model. As a means of
demonstration of the proposed framework level, the DREAM approach is applied in a
comprehensive case study of a heterogeneous cas ABM of a WSN observing a set of flock-
ing “boids”.
Chapter 6: In this chapter, the validated agent-based modeling level of the pro-
posed framework is proposed. The proposed methodology based a team-oriented approach
of in-simulation validation is demonstrated using three different application case studies
from three different scientific disciplines of ecology, telecommunications and social simu-
lation allowing for a proof of concept of the generalized and broad applicability of the
proposed methods.
Chapter7: In this chapter, the thesis is concluded. First the key research contribu-
tions are presented and are followed by a critical review of the framework levels in relation
with existing approaches in literature. This is followed by limitations and proposed future
enhancements proposed in the framework levels. Finally a set of possible future applica-
tion case studies ideas which can effectively employ the different framework levels is
presented.
Appendix 1: The appendix contains a description of the exact keywords associated
with the Scientometric study of agent-based computing.
- 23 -
2 Complex Adaptive Systems: Background and
Related Work
In the previous chapter, an overview of the entire thesis and the key contributions were
presented. In this chapter, basic background and a literature review of various concepts
needed for the understanding of the thesis are presented.
2.1 Overview
We start by first giving an overview of cas and their key characteristics. Next we give
specific examples of cas from natural and artificial systems. Subsequently we give an
overview of modeling of cas. Next, we give a review of agent-based modeling tools. This
is followed by a review of verification and validation of simulation models. Finally an
overview of different communication network simulators is presented.
2.2 Complex Adaptive Systems (cas)
Cas are a special type of complex systems which arise due to nonlinear interactions of
smaller components or agents[17]. While it is difficult to exactly define cas, Holland [35]
notes that:
“Even though these complex systems differ in detail, the question of coherence under change is
the central enigma for each. This common factor is so important that at the Santa Fe Institute we
collect these systems under a common heading, referring to them as complex adaptive systems
(cas). This is more than terminology. It signals our intuition that general principles rule cas behav-
ior, principles that point to ways of solving the attendant problems.”
The modern approach of cas has evolved from a series of attempts by researchers to de-
velop a comprehensive and general understanding of the world around us. Our world is
burgeoning with interactive entities. Most times, such interactions manifest themselves as
- 24 -
change of some type either internal to the entities (change of internal state) or else external
(change of external state or behavior). In other words, these entities adapt in networks of
interactions spread nonlinearly across the entire system spatially as well as temporally[36].
In the science of complexity, it is the “small” and “numerous” that govern changes in
the “large” and “few”. The interaction of small (micro) and perhaps simple components
gives rise to structures and behaviors, which are amazingly complex when observed from
the macro perspective[37]. Comprehension of the intricacies of these systems is so hard
that it has lead to not just one but a set of theories based on different observations and dif-
ferent types of modeling methodologies targeting different aspects of the system.
A simple example of such systems is that of life. Although not easily quantifiable, living
systems exhibit elegance absent in the monotonicity of complex but relatively inadaptable
inorganic and chaotic systems. Life surrounds us and embosoms us. Every living system
and life form known to us asserts itself with a display of a dualistic nature which on one
hand is decrepit and frail and on the other it has its own tinge of sturdiness and resilience,
hard to imagine in any engineered systems[38]. The frailty of complex living systems is
apparent because all complex life forms seem stamped with a “certain” programmed expi-
ration date because the growth and aging of most multi-cellular living organisms is
governed by the complex behavior encoded in the genes. On the other hand, a closer exam-
ination reveals the Complexity and resilience working inside the systems. From apparent
humble beginnings and small components (DNA, RNA, genomes, amino acids, proteins
and cells etc.), the complexity of each life form emerges to give complex features such as
muscles, tissues, systems, of which the most important is cognition and “self” for higher
life forms.
A human embryo which starts as just a single cell replicates and forms a complete hu-
man being which is not just a blob of identical cells but has an extremely intricate and
- 25 -
complex structure, with organs, systems and dynamics. Looking at the single cell embryo,
it is hard to imagine how it could end up in forming this amazingly complex life form[39].
If we examine the cell closely, it is hard not to think as to how exactly does this one cell,
which divides into two and then four and so on, apparently suddenly bloom into complex
structures without any apparent set of “physical” guiding forces or advanced sensory abili-
ties such as one which coordinates all cells to form global structures. And when the
structures do mature into systems, it makes one wonder how really do the multiple cells
synchronize to gradually start the dynamic phenomenon associated with complex life
forms, such as the blood flow, breathing, digestion, clotting, immune systems and emo-
tions, thoughts, family, social systems and so on? The interesting part of all this is that the
guiding principles of the entire life of the organism or life form are coded inside the genes,
part of the cell’s nucleus.
Another example of similar complex systems is human and animal social systems,
where interactions are once again the key to understanding the larger perspective of things.
The concept of “country”, “social or ethnic groups”, “families”, “clans”, “universities”,
“civilizations”, “religion” and so on are extremely powerful and govern the life of every
human being. However, these phenomena are in one way or the other, rooted in the con-
cepts of interactions. All this makes one thing very obvious. Our current science is known
to miss the big picture of complexity. Developing this understanding further would assist
us in understanding life, the universe and everything that exists[37].
This absence of the “complete picture” is at the heart of research in cas and the closely
related movements such as the “Complexity theory”[17] and the “Systems Biology theo-
ry”[14]. In contrast to reductionism which is rooted in simplifications and thus gives a
misleading confidence that understanding the parts will somehow “ensure” that we will be
able to understand the whole, the complex systems approach focuses instead on a specific
- 26 -
meaning of the phrase “The whole is more than the parts”. Here, literature notes that the
key factor in understanding cas is to understand the “interactions” of the parts which can-
not be quantified easily.
2.2.1 The Seven Basics of cas
Holland maintains that there are seven basics of cas. Four of these are properties and
three are mechanisms. These have been termed basics because he notes that other cas-
related ideas can be considered as derivates of these. The following discussion is based on
Holland’s description of properties and mechanisms of cas [35]:
1. Aggregation (property)
The word “Aggregation” follows from “aggregate”, which, according to the Oxford
English Dictionary, means “Collected into one body”. Aggregation is useful in two ways,
firstly as a generalization where different items can be categorized in a single big and oft-
reused umbrella, e.g. animals, plants, bags, baskets etc. In other words, this is a way of ab-
straction as well since it allows focus on the important details to be modeled and ignores
those which can be ignored. This type of aggregation is perhaps classification and is more
related to cognition rather than actual physical containment, to which the second type of
aggregation may be attributed. Holland points out the formation of complex agents called
meta-agents in living and social systems (whether natural or artificial) based on complex
behavior of smaller, simpler agents.
An example can be seen in Figure 3, where we notice that seemingly without any global
intelligence, the shape of the melon is an example of emergence based on the complex in-
teractions of its constituent components, such as skin, seeds and other parts, which are
made up of other structures, eventually coming down to cells and sub-cellular structures.
- 27 -
Figure 3: Peculiar shape and striations in a melon
2. Tagging (Mechanism)
Tagging is a mechanism which is frequently observed in cas. Tagging allows for the
formation of aggregates. Tagging is exhibited in cas in the same manner as flags are used
to identify troops or messages are given IP addresses to reach the correct destination in a
network etc.
3. Nonlinearity (Property)
Nonlinear interactions are the norm in cas and are one of the reasons in the emergent
global behaviors which indicate that the system is a cas.
4. Flows (Property)
Another property of cas is the formation of dynamic networks and flows. As such there
are numerous attributes such as seen in Economics e.g. The Multiplier Effect when an ex-
tra amount of a resource is added to a flow causing it to transform as well as transmit
between different nodes. Another important behavioral property that can be observed in
flows is the recycling effect where resources are recycled over the flows via the network
nodes thus enriching the emergent behavior. An example of the effects of recycling is the
- 28 -
emergence of large number of insect and animal species in undisturbed forests as discussed
by Nair [40]. Similar example is in the case of plants; Lowman notes the patterns of emer-
gence, growth, mortality and herbivory of five rain-forest tree species[41].
5. Diversity (Property)
The species of a rainforest, people living in large towns, vendors in malls, structure of
the mammalian brain all exhibit extreme diversity. So, it is rare to see the same type of
components if any of these cas are explored in depth.
Being a dynamic property, diversity also has self-repairing and self-healing charac-
teristics. Disturbing the population of a particular predator in a forest can result in an
increase of numbers of several prey species which can then result in an increase of num-
bers of the same or other predators. Lima[42] notes that continuous predation can lead to
major impact on entire ecosystems. Hein and Gillooly [43] have recently demonstrated that
dispersal and resource limitation can jointly regulate assembly dynamics of predators and
preys.
6. Internal Models (Mechanism)
Internal models are a mechanism by which agents inside a cas keep models of other in-
dividuals. On first looks, such a model would seem to be the property of only intelligent
mammals. However, a closer look reveals that even the seemingly extremely simple life
forms such as bacteria and viruses need to keep models of a certain kind of their environ-
ment and their hosts. These models are important for the survival of the species in general
and thus the fact that a particular species still exists is a testimony that the species can de-
fend its own in the particular environment (as has been happening for perhaps millions of
years). Berg[44] notes that E. coli exhibit model behavior because they exhibit motility to-
wards regions in their environment that are deemed favorable.
7. Building Blocks (Mechanism)
- 29 -
Internal models as described in the previous section need to be enhanced by realistic
mechanisms. These realistic mechanisms are termed as the “Building blocks”. As an ex-
ample, a diverse numbers of human beings form the 6+ Billion human population and they
can each be basically differentiated from each other based on only a few set of building
blocks such as eyes, nose, lips, hair, face etc. Variations in these blocks include changes in
constituent attributes such as their color, shape etc. and eventually form the basis of the
internal models.
In this section, we have noted how complex adaptive systems are structured and how
they have a set of complex features which need to be examined closely to see why the sys-
tems behave in the peculiar manner at the global scale. We next talk a bit about
“emergence”.
2.2.2 Emergence
Emergent behavior in cas has traditionally been considered difficult to define and hard
to detect. Yaneer Bar Yam[45] defines emergence as follows:
“Emergence refers to the existence or formation of collective behaviors — what parts
of a system do together that they would not do alone.”
Yaneer also notes that emergence can be considered as a means of explaining collective
behavior or properties of a group of components or agents or else it can also be used to
describe a system in relation to the environment. Boschetti and Gray [13] describe three
levels of emergence:
1. Pattern Formation and detection such as oscillating reactions etc.
2. Intrinsic Emergence such as flocking behavior
3. Causal Emergence such as human behavior using messaging.
- 30 -
2.3 Examples of cas
Cas can be both natural as well as artificial. Here we give some examples of different
types of cas. Next, we give specific examples of natural and artificial cas.
Figure 4: Tree stem adapting structure temporally
2.3.1 Natural cas example 1: Cas in plants
An example of adaptation in a natural system can be seen in Figure 4 where we see a
tree stem adapting according to the peculiar shape of an artificial metallic structure. One
cas which can be noted here is the complete plant. The plant itself is made up of numerous
cells interacting and performing tasks based on programs from their genomes. However
each cell is unaware of the large scale features of the plant or the way it interacts with the
environment such as the emergent behavior of adaptation that can be observed in the figure
in response to the position of the metallic structure as well as the path followed by sun for
- 31 -
a better chance at getting sunlight. This emergent behavior can be seen as essentially a trait
which has helped plants and animal species to survive over millions of years.
2.3.2 Natural cas example 2: Cas in social systems
While humans themselves are made up of several cas originating from living cells and a
variety of bacteria, viruses and other biochemical organic molecules. All these play an im-
portant role in the individual as well as social lives of living beings. An example is given
here in the domain of the research process, which can, by far, be considered as one of the
most complex social interaction, based on intelligent behavior.
A research paper published in a peer-reviewed venue represents the culmination of
efforts of a large number of interactions. Some of the entities involved in a research paper
are as follows:
◼ Authors and their Papers which were read during the study by the researcher
◼ Discussions and meetings with colleagues
◼ Advice by advisors
◼ Advice by conference or journal referees during the peer-review process
◼ And so on . . .
One way of understanding this all is to notice that this entire process reflects a highly
dynamic cas with multiple intelligent and inorganic (or even cyber-) entities such as pa-
pers, reviews and Journals. Several emergent behaviors can be observed here such as the
propagation of research, formation of research groups, rise and fall of academic journals
and their impact factors, emerging trends and these are all based on an enormous commu-
nity of people spread globally, which do not even understand or even, at times, do not need
to understand the exact structure and dynamics of how research leads to emergent behav-
ior.
- 32 -
A quantitative study of scientific communication is technically termed as scientomet-
rics [46]. Scientometrics requires the use of a multitude of sophisticated techniques
including Citation Analysis, Social Network Analysis and other quantitative techniques for
mapping and measurement of relationships and flows between people, groups, organiza-
tions, computers, research papers or any other knowledge-based entities.
Scientometrics sometimes involves the use of domain visualization, a relatively newer
research front. The idea is to use information visualization to represent large amounts of
data in research fronts[47]. This allows the viewer to look at a large corpus and develop
deeper insights based on a high level view of the map[48]. Visualization using various
network modeling tools has been performed considerably for social network analysis of
citation and other complex networks[49]. Various types of Scientometric analyses have
previously been performed for domains such as HIV/AIDS [50], Scientometrics [51], Mex-
ican Astronomers[52], scientific collaborations [53] and engineers in South Africa [54].
Extensive work on research policy has been performed by Leydesdroff [46]. Some of the
recent studies in this direction include visualization of the HCI domain[55], identification
of the proximity clusters in dentistry research[56], visualization of the pervasive computing
domain[57], visualization of international innovation Journals[58] as well as identification
of trends in the Consumer Electronics Domain[2].
Scientometric studies which combine co-citation analysis with visualizations greatly
enhance the utility of the study. They allow the readers to quickly delve into the deeper as-
pects of the analysis. Co-citation analysis measures the proximity of documents in various
scientific categories and domain. These analyses include primarily the author and the jour-
nal co-citation analyses. Journal co-citation analysis identifies the role of the key journals
in a scientific domain. In contrast, the author co-citation analysis[59] especially by using
visualization[60] offers a view of the structures inside a domain. The idea is based on the
- 33 -
hypothesis that the higher the frequency of co-citation of two authors, the stronger the sci-
entific relation between them. Whereas document co-citation maps co-citations of
individual documents [61-63], author co-citation focuses on body of literature of individual
authors. In addition, co-citation cluster analysis of documents is useful for the display of
the examination of scientific knowledge evolution structure at the macro level. In initial
cluster analysis, techniques involved clustering highly cited documents using clustering
based on single-links. Subsequently clustering is also performed on the resultant clusters
numerous times[64]. Recent techniques involve the use of computational algorithms to per-
form this clustering. These clusters are then color coded to reflect that.
If we were to take some of these entities, and analyze the data, we can come up with
quite interesting networks e.g. as shown in Figure 5. This network represents top papers,
in terms of citations, with topics related to “agent-based modeling” from the years 1990 –
2010. As can be seen here, the network visualization is clearly allowing the separation of
the top journals in this field in terms of “centrality” measures such as degree, betweenness,
eccentricity or indices or clustering coefficients as described in previous section. Com-
plex Network are not only formed from social interactions. Rather they can be developed
from any cas system interaction such as systems inside living beings[29].
Journal Citation Reports (JCR) has been considered in literature as the key indicator of
a Journal’s scientific repute[65]. It is pertinent to note here that previously researchers such
as Amin and Mabe [66] have critically reviewed the way Journal impact factor might be
used by authors and journals. While alternatively other researchers have proposed new al-
ternative impact factors such as by Braun [67] and Fersht [68]. However, the fact remains
that, in general, the scientific contributions listed in Thomson Reuters Web of Science are
considered highly authentic by the overall scientific community[69], [70].
- 34 -
Figure 5: Complex Network model showing different Journals publishing articles related to
agent-based modeling. Bigger caption represents a higher centrality measure explained later in the
chapter.
2.3.3 Artificial cas example 1: Complex adaptive communication networks
In this section, we introduce complex adaptive communication networks. Complex
adaptive communication networks are a recent advancement in artificial cas. Primarily the-
se are communication networks which have a large number of components resulting in
behavior associated with cas. These networks arise due to a recent rapid advancements in
communication technology because today’s communication networks such as those formed
by wireless sensor, ad-hoc, Peer-Peer (P2P), multiagent, nano-Communication and mobile
robot communication networks, are all expected to grow larger and more complex than
ever previously anticipated. Thus, these networks, at times, can possibly give rise to com-
plex global behaviors similar to natural cas. As a result, network designers can expect to
observe unprecedented emergent patterns. Such patterns can be important to understand
since, at times, they can have considerable effect on various aspects in a communication
network such as unanticipated traffic congestion, unprecedented increase in communica-
- 35 -
tion cost or perhaps a complete network/grid shutdown as a result of emergent behavior.
Some well-known examples include the emergence of cascading faults in Message Queue-
based financial transactions after New Year holidays[71], recent cascading failures reported
in the Amazon.com cloud[72], effects of viral and worm infections in large networks, ef-
fects of torrent and other complex traffic in Internet Service Providers and corporate
networks, multi-player gaming and other similar P2P traffic in company intranets, self-
organization and self-assembly related effects in sensor and robotic networks[73].
The torrent protocol is an example of an artificial cas since it exhibits a number of inter-
esting properties associated with cas. It relies on software called the “torrent clients”
which, as can be seen in Figure 6 allow autonomous and almost anonymous interaction
with other clients around the globe. The different peers autonomously self-organize and
adapt to both download as well as upload files. Here, the emergent phenomenon is the
downloading of the file. The interactions, allocations of bandwidth, uploading and down-
loading of chunks are part of the nonlinear interactions.
The way this entire process the process of uploading and downloading (sharing) files
works is outlined by Cohen in [74] as follows:
1. The peer computer which starts to share a file breaks the file into a number of iden-
tically sized pieces with byte sizes of a power of 2 anywhere from 32 KB to 16 MB
each. Each piece is hashed using SHA-1 hash function and this information is rec-
orded in the .torrent file.
2. Peers with a complete file copy are called seeders and those providing the initial
copy are called the initial seeders.
3. The .torrent is a collective set of information about the file coupled with the infor-
mation about tracker servers allowing peer discovery of downloaders.
4. The trackers give random lists of peers to other peers.
- 36 -
5. The different peers automatically self-adapt to download the complete file from dis-
tributed chunks of file from all over the globe.
6. Peers who only download and do not upload are punished by lesser bandwidth while
peers who upload as well are given higher bandwidths.
7. The emergent behaviors here include the file sharing (upload and download) and re-
duction of peers who only download.
Figure 6: Artificial Global cas formed by P2P clients observed using utorrent software
2.3.4 Artificial cas example 2: Simulation of flocking boids
In 1986, a computational model of flocking animal motion was presented by Craig
Reynolds [75] called the “boids”. The model is based on three separate but simple rules.
The first rule is “separation” which involves steering to avoid crowding. The second rule is
“alignment”, which steers the boid towards the average heading of local flockmates. And
the third rule is “cohesion”, which steers towards the average position of local flockmates.
The “boids” model has been considered a model of realistic simulations ranging from
SIGGRAPH presentations to Hollywood. This model offers an example of complex adap-
tive behavior based on apparently local rules of the mobile agents or boids.
- 37 -
2.4 Modeling cas
The word “Model” is defined by Merriam-Webster in 13 different ways:
1 obsolete : a set of plans for a building
2 dialect British : copy, image
3 : structural design *a home on the model of an old farmhouse*
4 : a usually miniature representation of something; also : a pattern of something to be made
5 : an example for imitation or emulation
6 : a person or thing that serves as a pattern for an artist; especially : one who poses for an
artist
7 : Archetype
8 : an organism whose appearance a mimic imitates
9 : one who is employed to display clothes or other merchandise : Mannequin
10 a : a type or design of clothing b : a type or design of product (as a car)
11 : a description or analogy used to help visualize something (as an atom) that cannot be di-
rectly observed
12 : a system of postulates, data, and inferences presented as a mathematical description of an
entity or state of affairs
13 : Version
Critically speaking, modeling a system is important for the survival of the human race.
The entire concept of cognition appears to be based on modeling. We start our learning by
experiencing this world, which leads us to the development of cognitive “mental” models.
Then we use these models to associate with other experiences or knowledge to keep learn-
ing. As an example a baby develops a first implicit “model” of heat if s/he touches a hot
bottle of milk. Later on, in her life, she keeps learning more and more about temperature
and heat while whether she consciously realizes it or not, all new models are rooted essen-
tially with the basic cognitive model. This kind of models have been termed as “implicit”
models[76].
Implicit models, however, are hard to express and are not very communicable. What
one person perceives of a certain concept, might mean a totally different thing to another.
- 38 -
This is the reason for the development of what Epstein, an authority in modeling, mentions
as “explicit models” [16].
Modeling implies a certain level of understanding and prowess over the system and re-
quires a deep study of certain aspects of the system. When it is not just one system, rather a
group of systems, modeling implies developing abstractions, which can cover different
domains.
Previous techniques have included focus on physics as a means of modeling. Such for-
mal models typically are simplified models representing the system as e.g. Differential
equations. Obviously by limiting an entire system to only a few equations implies that
most aspects of the system including the components have been reduced to simple num-
bers, e.g. quantities such as change of numbers etc. However, more recently modeling cas
often entails using one of two basic methods of developing computational models i.e. Ei-
ther use of Agent based modeling to develop simulation models or else development of
complex network models for analysis of interactions using real world or simulation data as
shall be discussed in detail in the next section. Although these models prevail in literature,
to the best of our knowledge, there is no unified framework which outlines this set of ideas
and couples them along with agent-based models.
2.4.1 Complex Network Modeling
In this section, an overview of complex network methods is presented. The basic idea of
Complex Network Analysis originates from graph theory. A complex network is essentially
an advanced graph, where unlike theoretical graphs, each node and edge is loaded with
more information. As an example, if we were to develop a social network of friends, the
network edges could represent the level of emotions which the friends have for each other.
So, if a person Alice considers three people (say Bob, Cassandra and David) as friends,
- 39 -
then this could be represented as a network. Suppose Alice considers Cassandra as her best
friend so this could be modeled in the network by giving a higher attribute value to the
link/edge between Alice and Cassandra. To make things more interesting, the network
could be directed so it is possible that Bob might not even consider Alice as a friend. So,
each friendship relation should be represented by a directed edge.
Using various Mathematical tools and models, complex networks can be subsequently
analyzed and compared with other models from the same or different domains. As an ex-
ample Barabasi [77] compares Biological networks with models of the world wide web.
Besides classification, networks can also be used to discover important features of the nu-
merous nodes (or components) of the cas. While Complex Networks are a general set of
methods, the growth of literature of complex network usage can be identified across vari-
ous cas literature ranging from Social Network Analysis[30] to Biological Networks [29]
and in Citation Networks[78].
2.4.1.1 Complex Network Methods
In a cas, interactions can be modeled as networks. The key difficulty in network design
is to understand which data needs to be captured to develop the network model(s). Once
the data has been converted to a network, there exist a large number of complex network
analysis Mathematical and software tools for performing the analysis. However, the hard
part here is the selection of data, the design and extraction of the complex network models.
While application of the actual centrality measures appears to be deceptively easy due to
the existence of a large set of software tools for assistance, it can be very difficult to actual-
ly come up with data which is relevant as well as generates useful networks, which can
represent the entire cas properly. Development of partial networks can result in completely
incorrect results as complete networks are required for the accurate calculation of centrality
- 40 -
measures (as discussed in the next section). Calculation of centrality measures requires the
use of all possible nodes in a connected network.
2.4.1.2 Theoretical basis
Graph theory has a long history. One of the earliest known representation of graph prob-
lem is the Leonard Euler’s “Konigsberg bridge problem” in 1735which involved
representing a map of the river Pregel in the form of a graph[79].
A graph G = (V, E) is essentially formed by a set of vertices or nodes V and a set of
edges or arcs E. Each edge is assigned to two vertices, where the vertices might not be dis-
junct. Graph nodes as well as edges are given other alpha-numeric attributes including the
physical coordinates for display purposes. Networks are typically analyzed using the fol-
lowing methods:
1. Global network properties: Since real-world cas differ from purely randomly gen-
erated networks, they can be distinctly categorized using global properties. Three
distinct types of network models have been used in literature. The first one is the
Erdős-Rényi random network model[80]. The second model was proposed by Watts
and Strogatz by analysis of many real-world networks which they discovered to
have a smaller average shortest path length coupled with a high clustering coeffi-
cient as compared with random networks. These networks are labeled the Watts and
Strogatz small-world model[81] after their discoverers. Another model, called the
scale-free network model was proposed by Barabasi and Albert [82] based on ideas
of complex networks from real-world cas domains. These networks exhibit some
degree of a power law distribution in the “degree centrality”. This implies that they
contain very few nodes with a higher degree and a large number of nodes with a
lower degree.
- 41 -
2. Network centralities: Unlike global network properties, centralities deal with par-
ticular nodes. As such, using a centrality analysis, different nodes can be ranked
according to their importance in Centrality indices. It is pertinent to note that not all
centrality measures might give substantial results for a particular network. As such,
it is typical to develop numerous networks as well as perform considerable analysis
by trial and error before a particular extraction of network as well as a centrality
measure is discovered showing significant results.
3. Network motifs: Motifs are commonly used network architectural patterns. They
are often used in cas modeling to discover particular patterns of local interactions.
Examples include signal transduction[83] and gene regulatory biological
networks[84]. Recent work includes Davidson [85] who has demonstrated emerg-
ing properties in Gene regulatory networks.
4. Network clustering: Biological networks have been studied in the form of hierar-
chical structures with motifs and pathways at lower levels to functional molecules
for large scale organization of networks by Oltvai and Barabasi[86].
2.4.1.3 Centralities and other Network measures
In this section, a description of some of the commonly used quantitative measures in com-
plex networks is provided.
2.4.1.3.1 Clustering Coefficient
The clustering coefficient is a means of quantitative measurement of the local cohe-
siveness in a complex network. It is a measure of the probability that two vertices with a
common neighbor are connected.
- 42 -
The formula for calculation of the clustering coefficient is given as follows:
Ci =
2Ei
ki (ki −1)
(2.1)
Where
Ei = number of edges between neighbors of a node i
ki = degree of the node i
The global/mean clustering coefficient C = <Ci> is found by taking an average of all the
clustering coefficients.
2.4.1.3.2 Matching Index
Matching index gives a quantitative means of measuring the number of common
neighbors between any two vertices. In other words, for empirical networks, two function-
ally similar vertices need not be directly connected with each other. It is formally defined
as following:
M =
Nk ,l Aik Ajl
(2.2) ij k + k − N A A
i j k ,l ik jl
Where the numerator represents the common neighbors while the denominator rep-
resents the total number of neighbors of the two nodes i and j.
2.4.1.3.3 Centrality measures
A centrality is formally defined as a function
C :V : R for a directed or undirected
graph G = (V , E) [29]. A centrality is a real number assigned to each vertex allowing for a
pair-wise comparison across the entire network.
- 43 -
2.4.1.3.3.1 Degree Centrality
Degree centrality or simply “degree” of a node is a basic centrality measure which
identifies the connections of a node with other nodes. For directed networks, there can be
two kinds of degree centrality measures. The in-degrees and the out-degrees can be found
by the summation of the total in-links and the total out-links respectively. Degree centrality
is regarded as a local centrality measure however nodes having a higher degree can be
more important as compared with nodes with a lower degree. As such, deletion of high de-
gree nodes can disrupt the network structure and flow of interactions.
2.4.1.3.3.2 Eccentricity Centrality
Eccentricity of a node v is defined as the maximum distance between v and u for all
nodes u. Eccentricity centrality assists in computation of the maximum distance, which can
be defined as the length/distance of the longest shortest path to all other vertices present in
the network. Nodes which are easily reachable from other nodes receive the highest value.
Eccentricity identifies the node that can be reached within equal distance from all other
nodes in the network. Mathematically, eccentricity can be defined as:
Cecc(s) = 1
max{dist(s, t)}
(2.3)
Where
s and t are the nodes belonging to the set of vertices V
2.4.1.3.3.3 Closeness Centrality
Closeness centrality is similar to eccentricity but utilizes the minimum distance from a
target node to all other nodes within the network.
- 44 -
The formula for the calculation of the closeness centrality is of a node s for all nodes t is
given as follows:
Cclo(s) = 1
dist(s, t)
(2.4)
2.4.1.3.3.4 Shortest Path Betweenness Centrality
It is calculated by measuring the number of times a particular node comes in the shortest
path between any two nodes. In other words, it identifies the ability of a node to monitor
communication across the network. A higher value implies a better ability of a particular
node to monitor network communication. Mathematically it can be defined as:
Cspb(v) = st (v)
st
(2.5)
Where
st (v) is the number of the shortest paths between nodes s and t containing the ver-
tex v between the nodes
st is the total number of the shortest paths present between two nodes s and t
2.4.1.4 Software tools for Complex Networks
While Complex Network Analysis uses a number of mathematical tools, some of which
have been described in this chapter, for practical reasons, network scientists use a number
of software tools for performing network operations. These include network construction,
extraction, simulation, visualization and analysis tools such as Network Workbench[87],
Pajek[88] and Citespace[89], Cytoscape[90], Visone[91] and others.
- 45 -
2.4.2 Agent-based Modeling and Agent-based Computing
Agent-based Computing ranges from building intelligent agents to multiagent systems
and agent-based simulation models. There has been considerable focus in the Artificial In-
telligence and other research communities on something which has been termed agent-
based computing[92], [93]. Although prevalent across a number of domains, there is con-
siderable confusion in the literature regarding clearly a differentiation between its various
flavors. Here we shall attempt to disambiguate its various levels by providing a hopefully
clear set of definitions of the various terms and their uses.
2.4.2.1 Agent-Oriented Programming
The first of the agent-oriented paradigm which we see is focused more on the increased
use of artificially intelligent agents such as proposed by Russell and Norvig [94]. The fo-
cus here is on developing more complexity in an individual agent rather than on a large set
of agents.
2.4.2.2 Multi-agent oriented Programming
While agent-oriented programming focused on individual agents, it was difficult to ac-
tually design, implement and run multiple agents with such intricate internals because of
the need for massively parallel computational resources for even simple problems. Howev-
er, multiagent-oriented programming typically attempts to add at least some intelligence to
agents and observe their interactions. One thing to note here is that typically such models
have either few agents with a focus on certain aspects only, or else do not implement a
whole lot of complex behaviors[94], [95]. The primary reason for not implementing all in-
telligent paradigms is the inability to perform all such calculations in real-time in any
currently known artificial computational system. That is one reason why online algorithms
in AI typically use simplistic mechanisms for searching such as heuristic functions other
- 46 -
than purely reactive simple or table-driven agents (which can just perform an if else type of
actions). Another key problem is the knowledge-engineering bottleneck[96], where the
agents had difficulty communicating with each other. Although partially solved by lan-
guages such as Knowledge Query Manipulation Language (KQML)[97] and DARPA
Agent Markup Language (DAML)[98] and DAML+OIL[99] language released in 2000-01
time frame, practically large-scale intelligent agents have not seen the daylight of most
commercial or real-life scenarios (such as earlier predicted by agent-technology evange-
lists).
2.4.2.3 Agent-based Or Massively multiagent Modeling
One particular application of agents, which actually has found extensive use is what is
termed as individual or agent-based models. The key idea in these models is the focus on
use of “simple” simulated agents interacting with a large population of other agents with
emphasis on observing the global behavior. Here instead of the individual agents them-
selves, the interest of researchers is on the use of the interaction at the micro-level to
observe features at the global values. The focus of main-stream agent-based modeling and
simulation has been either social systems [20], [100] or else ecosystems[101], [102] .
. In this section, we shall review these paradigms further. Agent-based models [103] (or
individual-based models as termed in some scientific disciplines) have been used for the
modeling of a wide variety of complex systems[104]. Their use ranges from as diverse as
Biological Systems[105-120] to Social systems[121], [122], from Financial systems [123]
to supply chains [124], from the modeling of honey bees[125] to modeling of traffic
lights[126]. With such an impressive set of applications the strength of agent-based model-
ing[127] is quite apparent. However, with such a parallel evolution of ideas, there also
exists a set of domain-specific and perhaps conflicting concepts. These emerge primarily
due to a lack of communication or standardization between different scientific domains.
- 47 -
One possible explanation of the prevalence of agent-based modeling in such a diverse
set of scientific domains could be the models is their similarity to the human Cognition be-
cause perhaps this is how most humans perceive the surrounding world. In general, agent-
based models are particularly useful for developing models of Complex Adaptive Systems.
Typical examples of software used to develop agent-based modeling and simulation are
NetLogo[128], StarLogo[129], Repast [19], MASON[95], Swarm [130] and others .
2.4.2.4 Benefits of Agent-based Thinking
For system modeling involving a large number of interacting entities, at times it is more
appropriate to be able to access parameters of each individual “agent”. In emerging com-
munication paradigms, network modelers need to model a variety of concepts such as life
forms, sensors and robots. Agent-based thinking allows for direct addressability of individ-
ual entities or agents. The concept of breeds allows system designer to freely address
various system entities. In agent-based modeling and simulation, agents are designed to be
addressed for performing a certain action.
Using a type name, agents or “turtles” can be asked to perform actions or change
their attributes. Agent-based models are developed with a high level of abstraction in mind.
In contrast to programming abstracts such as loops, designers ask agents without worrying
about the low-level animation or interaction details necessary for execution. As such, this
results in the production of compact programs with a high degree of functionality.
An important benefit of small programs is their ability to greatly reduce the tweak-test-
analyze cycle. Thus it is more likely to model complex paradigms within a short time
without worrying about the lower layers of other parameters unless they are important for
the particular application. As we shall see in this chapter, it also has great expressive power
and most of all, is fun to use. Although being used very frequently to model complex and
- 48 -
self-organizing systems it has not previously been used extensively to model computer
networks.
2.5 A Review of Agent-based Tools
In the arena of agent-based tools, a number of popular tools are available. These range
from Java based tools such as Mason to Logo based tools such as: StarLogo, NetLogo
[128] etc. Each of these tools has different strengths and weaknesses. In the rest of the
chapter, we focus on just one of these tools: NetLogo as a representative of this set. Build-
ing on the experience of previous tools based on the Logo language, NetLogo has been
developed from grounds up for complex systems research. Historically, NetLogo has been
used for modeling and simulation of complex systems including multi-agent systems, so-
cial simulations, biological systems etc, on account of its ability to model problems based
on human abstractions rather than purely technical aspects. However, it has not been wide-
ly used to model computer networks, to the best of our knowledge.
2.5.1 NetLogo Simulation: An overview
In this section, we introduce NetLogo and demonstrate its usefulness using a number of
modeling and simulation experiments. NetLogo is a popular tool based on the Logo lan-
guage with a strong user base and an active publicly supported mailing list. It provides
visual simulation and is freely available for download and has been used considerably in
multi-agent systems literature. It has also been used considerably in social simulation and
complex adaptive networks[131]. One thing which distinguishes NetLogo from other tools
is its very strong user support community. Most times, you can get a reply from someone
in the community in less than a day. NetLogo also contains a considerable number of code
samples and examples. Most of the time, it is rare to find a problem for which there is no
- 49 -
similar sample freely available either within NetLogo’s model library or elsewhere from
the NetLogo M&S community.
Based on the Logo language, the NetLogo world consists of an interface which is made
up of “patches”. The inhabitants of this world can range from turtles to links. In addition,
one can have user interface elements such as buttons, sliders, monitors, plots and so on.
NetLogo is a visual tool and is extremely suitable for interactive simulations. When one
first opens up a NetLogo screen, an interface with a black screen is visible. There are three
main tabs and a box called the command center. Briefly, the interface tab is used to work
on the user interface manually and the “Information” tab is used to write the documenta-
tion for the model. And finally the “procedures” tab is where the code is actually written.
The “command center” is a sort of an interactive tool for working directly with the simula-
tion. It can be used for debugging as well as trying out commands similar to the interpreter
model which, if successful, can be incorporated in one’s program. The commands of a
NetLogo procedure can be executed in the following main contexts:
The key inhabitants of the Logo world are the turtles which can be used to easily model
network nodes. The concept of agents/turtles is to provide a layer of abstraction. In short,
the simulation can address much more complex paradigms which include pervasive mod-
els, environment or terrain models or indeed any model the M&S specialist can conceive
of without requiring much additional add-on modules. However, the tool is extensible and
can be directly connected to Java based modules. By writing modules using Java, the tool
can potentially be used as the front end of a real-time monitoring or interacting simulation.
For example, we could have a java based distributed file synchronization system, which
reports results to the NetLogo interface and vice versa, the NetLogo interface could be
used by the user to setup the simulation at the backend (e.g. how many machines, how
many files to synchronize and subsequently with the help of the simulation, the user could
- 50 -
simply monitor the results). Although the same can be done with a lot of other tools and
technologies, the difference is that NetLogo offers these facilities almost out of the box and
requires minimal coding besides being non-commercial, free and easy-to-install. A single
place where the turtle exists is a patch. Observer is a context, which can be used in general
without relating to either a patch or a turtle. The NetLogo user manual, which comes pre-
packaged with NetLogo, says: “Only the observer can ask all turtles or all patches. This
prevents you from inadvertently having all turtles ask all turtles or all patches ask all
patches, which is a common mistake to make if you're not careful about which agents will
run the code you are writing.”
Inside the NetLogo world, we have the concept of agents. Coming from the domain of
complex systems, all agents inside the world can be addressed in any conceivable way,
which the user can think of, e.g., if we want to change the color of all nodes with commu-
nication power less than 0.5W, a user can simply say: ask nodes with [power < 0.5] [set
color green] or if a user wants to check nodes with two link neighbors only, this can be
done easily too and so on.
The context of each command is one of three. Observer object is the context, when the
context is neither turtle nor the patch. It is called the observer because this can be used in
an interactive simulation where the simulation user can interact in this or other context us-
ing the command window.
Although there are no real rules to creating a NetLogo program, one could design a pro-
gram to have a set of procedures which can be called directly from the command center.
However, in most cases, it suffices to have user interface buttons to call procedures. For the
sake of this chapter, we shall use the standard technique of buttons.
- 51 -
In this program there will be two key buttons; Setup and the Go buttons. The idea is that
the “setup” button is called only once and the “go” button is to be called multiple times
(automatically). These can be inserted easily by right clicking anywhere on the interface
screen and selecting buttons. So, just to start with NetLogo, the user will need to insert the-
se two buttons in his or her model, remembering to write the names of the buttons in the
commands. For the go, we shall make it a forever button. A forever button is a button
which calls the code behind itself repeatedly. Now, the buttons show up with a red text.
This is actually NetLogo’s way of telling us that the commands here do not yet have any
code associated with them. So, let us create two procedures by the name of “setup” and
“go”. The procedures are written, as shown in Figure 7, in the procedures tab and the
comments (which come after a semi-colon on any line in NetLogo) explain the actions that
are performed by the commands. This code creates 100 turtles (nodes in this case) on the
screen. However the shape is a peculiar triangle by default and colors are assigned at ran-
dom. Note that we have written code here to have the patches colored randomly.
- 52 -
to go
ask turtles
[
fd 0.001; ask each turtle to move a small step
]
end
Figure 7 Code for setup
To create the procedure for the go, the code can be written as listed in Figure 8.
Figure 8 Code for go
Now, if we press setup followed by go, we see turtles walking slowly in a forward di-
rection on the screen, a snapshot of which is shown in Figure 9.
1. to setup
2. ca ; Clears everything so if we call setup again, it won’t
make a mess
3. crt 100 ;This means we are creating 100 turtles
4. [
5. setxy random-pxcor random-pycor ;These 100 turtles, we
want them to be spaced out at random
6. ; patch x and y co-ordinates
7. ]
8. let mycolor random 140 ; Randomly select a color value from
0 to 139
9. ask patches
10. [
- 53 -
Figure 9: Mobile Nodes
2.5.2 Overview of NetLogo for Modeling Complex interaction protocols
NetLogo allows for the modeling of various complex protocols. The model, however,
does not have to be limited to the simulation of only networks; it can readily be used to
model human users, intelligent agents, and mobile robots interacting with the system or
virtually any concept that the M&S designer feels worthwhile having in the model.
NetLogo, in particular, has the advantage of LISP-like[132] list-processing features. Thus
modeled entities can interact with computer networks. Alternatively, the simulation spe-
cialist can interact and create run-time agents to interact with the network to experiment
with complex protocols, which are not otherwise straightforward to conceive in terms of
programs.
- 54 -
As an example, let us suppose, if we were to model the number of human network man-
agers (e.g. from 10 to 100) attempting to manage a network of 10000 nodes by working on
workgroups the size of n nodes (e.g. ranging from 5 to 100) at one time while giving a total
of 8 hour shifts with network attacks coming in as a Poisson distribution; this can be mod-
eled in less than a few hours with only a little experience in NetLogo per se. The
simulation can then be used to evaluate policies of shifts to minimize network attacks.
Another example could be the modeling and simulation of link backup policies in case
of communication link failures in a complex network of 10,000 nodes along with network
management policies based on part-time network managers carrying mobile phones for
notification and management vs. full-time network managers working in shifts etc. all in
one simulation model. And to really make things interesting, we could try these out in re-
ality by connecting the NetLogo model to an actual J2ME based application in Symbian
phones using a Java extension; so the J2ME device sends updates using GPRS to a web
server which is polled by the NetLogo program to get updates while the simulation is up-
dated in a user interface provided by NetLogo. Again, although the same could be done by
a team of developers in a man-year or so of effort using different technologies, NetLogo
provides for coding these almost right out of the box and the learning curve is not steep
either.
This expressive nature of NetLogo allows modeling non-network concepts such as per-
vasive computing alongside human mobile users (e.g. in the formation of ad-hoc networks
for location of injured humans) or Body Area Networks come in play along with the net-
work. Now, it is important to note here that simulation would have been incomplete
without effective modeling of all related concepts which come into play. Depending upon
the application, these could vary from ambulances, doctors, nurses to concepts such as lap-
- 55 -
tops, injured humans etc. in addition to readily available connectivity to GIS data provided
by NetLogo extensions.
2.5.3 Capabilities in handling a range of input values
Being a general purpose tool, by design, the abstraction level of NetLogo is considered
higher. As such, the concepts of nodes, antenna patterns and propagation modeling are all
user-dependent. On one hand, this may look burdensome to the user accustomed to using
these on a regular basis, as it might appear that he or she will be working a little extra to
code these in NetLogo modeling. On the other hand, NetLogo allows for the creation of
completely new paradigms of network modeling, wherein the M&S specialist can focus on,
for example, purely self-organization aspects or on developing antenna patterns and propa-
gation modeling directly.
2.5.4 Range of statistics and complex metrics
NetLogo is a flexible tool in terms of using statistics and measurements. Any variable of
interest can be added as a global variable and statistics can be generated based on single or
multiple-run. Plots can be automatically generated for these variables as well.
Measurements of complex terms in NetLogo programs are very easy to perform. As an
example, if it is required to have complex statistics such as network assembly time, global
counters can be used easily for this. Similarly, statistics such as network throughput, net-
work configuration time, throughput delay can be easily modeled by means of similar
counters (which need not be integral). By default, NetLogo provides for real-time analysis.
Variables or reporters (functions which return values) can be used to measure real-time pa-
rameters and the analyst can actually have an interactive session with the modeled system
without modifying the code using the “Command Window”.
- 56 -
2.6 Verification and Validation of simulation models
2.6.1 Overview
Validation of a simulation model is a crucial task[31], [133]. Simulations, however well-
designed, are always only an approximation of the system and if it was so easy to build the
actual system, the simulation approach would never have been used [134]. In traditional
modeling and simulation practices, a standard approach to verification and validation
(V&V) is the three step approach given by Naylor et al. in [135] as follows:
1. The first step is to develop a model that can intrinsically be tested for a higher
level of face validity.
2. The next step is to validate the assumptions made in the model
3. Finally, the transformations of the input to output from the model need to be
compared with those for the actual real-world system.
2.6.2 Verification and Validation of ABMs
While verification and validation are important issues in any simulation model devel-
opment, in this section, we discuss the peculiarities associated with ABMs in the domain of
modeling and simulation of cas.
Firstly ABMs can be difficult to validate because there is a high tendency of errors and
un-wanted artifacts to appear during the development of an ABM as noted by Galan et al.
[136]. In addition, since the number of parameters in an ABM model can tend to be quite
high, Lucas et al. have noted that it is possible to fall into the trap of tweaking the variables
[137].
Bianchi et al. note that validation of agent based models can be quite challenging [138].
Another problem noted by Hodges and Dewar is as to how to ensure that the observed be-
- 57 -
havior is a true representative of the actual system[139]. Fagiolo et al. mention four set of
issues with Agent-Based models [140]:
1. A “lack of robustness”.
2. Absence of a high degree of comparability between developed agent-based models.
3. A dire shortage of standard techniques for the construction and analysis of agent-
based models.
4. Difficulties in correlation of the models with empirical data.
Keeping these issues in mind, while validation techniques of agent-based models have
been mentioned in some domains such as computational economics and social simulation,
there are still a number of open issues:
A. There is no standard way of building Agent-based Models.
B. There is no standard and formal way of validation of Agent-based Models.
C. Agent-Based Modeling and Agent-Based Simulations are considered in the same
manner because there is no formal methodology of agent-based modeling [141].
D. Agent-Based Models are primarily pieces of Software however no software process
is available for development of such models.
E. All validation paradigms for agent-based models are based on quantifying and
measurable values but none caters for emergent behavior [142], [143] such as traf-
fic jams, structure formation or self-assembly as these complex behaviors cannot be
quantified easily in the form of single or a vector of numbers.
F. Agent-based models are occasionally confused with multi-agent systems (MAS)
even though they are developed for completely different objectives; ABM are pri-
marily built as simulations of cas, whereas MAS are typically actual software or at
time, robotic systems. Although MASs may themselves be simulated in the form of
an ABM but that does not change their inherent nature. We would like to note here
- 58 -
that differences between MAS and ABMs have been discussed earlier in the chapter
and a further exposition to this effect will be performed in Chapter 3.
2.6.3 Related work on V&V of ABM
In social sciences literature such as in the case of Agents in Computation Economics
(ACE), empirical validation of agent-based models has been described by Fagiolo et al. in
[140]. Alternate approaches to empirical validation have been noted by Moss in [144]. Val-
idation of models is closely related to model replication as noted by Wilensky and Rand in
[145]. An approach of validation based on philosophical truth theories in simulations has
been discussed by Schmid in [146]. Another approach called "companion modeling", an
iterative participatory approach where multidisciplinary researchers and stakeholders work
together throughout a four-stage cycle has been proposed by Barreteau et al. in [147].
A different point of view also exists in literature which uses agent-based simulation as a
means of validation and calibration of other models such as by Makowsky in [148]. In ad-
dition, agent-based simulation has also been shown to be useful in the validation of multi-
agent systems by Cossentino et al. in [149].
2.7 Overview of communication network simulators
In this section, an overview of different types of simulators used for the simulation of
communication networks is provided.
2.7.1 Simulation of WSNs
Current sensor network simulation toolkits are typically based on simulators such as
NS-2, OPNET[150], J-Sim[151], TOSSIM[152] etc. SensorSim is a simulation framework
[153]. Amongst traditional network simulations, J-Sim and NS2 have been compared in
[151] and J-Sim has been shown to be more scalable. Atemu [154] on the other hand, fo-
cuses on simulation of particular sensors. Likewise, TOSSIM [152] is a TinyOS Simulator.
- 59 -
2.7.2 Simulation of P2P networks
In terms of simulation of P2P networks, on one hand, there are actual implementations
and on the other, there are simulators of the P2P protocols. These include Oversim [155]
which is based on the OMNET++[156] simulator. Another simulator for P2P networks is
the PeerSim[157] simulator.
2.7.3 Simulation of Robotic Swarms
In the case of swarm robotics, simulators include Swarm-Bot simulator [158] and
WebotsTM robot simulator[159]. Other simulators include LaRoSim which allows for ro-
botic simulations of large scales[160].
2.7.4 ABM for complex communication networks simulation
While we have noted above that individual sub-areas of this domain such as WSNs,
Swarm robots as well as P2P networks all have dedicated as well as general purpose simu-
lators but all of them are limited to their specific domain, the benefit of using ABM in the
modeling and simulation of complex communication networks is that it is a general pur-
pose methodology and thus it can be used to simulate any combination of these in addition
to being able to simulate other entities such as humans, plants and animals in the simula-
tion.
2.8 Conclusions
In this chapter, we have discussed the background and related work required for an
understanding of the subsequent chapters. We have discussed modeling and simulation and
its relation to cas research. In the next chapter, we present complex network modeling level
of the proposed framework, which is concerned with developing Complex Network models
and performing Complex Network Analysis of large amounts of cas interaction data.
- 60 -
3 Proposed Framework: Complex Network Mod-
eling Level
In this chapter, we propose the complex network modeling level of the unified frame-
work. This idea is to develop a level which encompasses existing complex network
modeling studies as well as allow other studies to be conducted. This level is applicable
when suitable interaction data is available from a given cas. The basic idea is to develop
graphs in the form of complex networks using interaction data of different cas components
and characteristics. Subsequently these complex networks can be used to perform a CNA
for the discovery of emergent patterns in the data; patterns which would otherwise not have
been apparent using either legacy statistical or other mathematical methods. While this
chapter can be considered a generalized methodology, it can also be considered as an ex-
tension of the previous chapter since the data used for analysis of the case studies includes
a case study about of agent-based computing. Whereas the second case study is in the do-
main of consumer electronics selected specifically to demonstrate the generalized
applicability of the proposed framework level.
3.1 Overview
This chapter demonstrates the application of CNA on two separate case studies. The
idea is to use Information visualization and Complex Network Analysis to discern complex
patterns in large corpora of reliable scientific interaction data.
Both case studies use different corpora but are based on the well-defined structured data
from the standard source of The Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WOS) which is well-
known as a standardized indexing database for scientific research papers. The corpora was
- 61 -
selected as the WOS since it is a stable index and has a well-defined methodology for add-
ing new data. While it is always possible to find some indexing errors in any database, this
particular dataset presents a suitable candidate better than most other manually collected
datasets. The first case study of the application of the proposed methods is on “Agent-
based Computing” while the second is on “Consumer Electronics”.
3.2 Generalized Methodology
In Figure 10, we give details of how complex network modeling level of the proposed
framework can be useful in developing complex network models of a cas and subsequently
performing CNA to determine emergent behavior and patterns in the data.
The first step is the acquisition or retrieval of interaction data. In other words, only data
which allows the development of interaction models would be needed in this framework
level. Typical summarized statistical data or records would not be sufficient for the devel-
opment of these models. Typically such data must demonstrate important relations of some
kind between various components to prove useful for complex network development.
After data retrieval, the next step is to develop complex network models. While it might
appear a trivial exercise to develop these models, it can actually take significant time and
effort before suitable networks can be developed. One especially difficult task is the selec-
tion of the most suitable columns for network extraction and construction. This exercise
can require extensive experimentation using trial and error before the most suitable col-
umns can be discovered for network construction. Network manipulation is often applied
to develop and extract suitable networks in an iterative manner. This can involve selective
removal, insertion, merging and splitting of various nodes and edges followed by refine-
ment of the network using various colors and sizes of the nodes and edges based on loaded
data from the cas components.
- 62 -
Figure 10 Proposed Methodology for the complex network modeling level (for the discovery of emer-
gent patterns based on available interaction data of cas components)
Gradually the networks start to shape up. Eventually this process can result in giving
useful information about the topological structure of the entire domain. This approach is
particularly useful when other basic approaches to modeling fail (such as using statistical
tests, machine learning, data mining etc.). The next step in this level is to perform CNA.
There are essentially two different types of CNA, which have been used in previous litera-
ture (and described earlier in Chapter 2). One type of CNA is useful for classification of
- 63 -
the entire network using global properties such as degree distribution. The other type of
CNA can often prove to be more useful and involves the calculation of various quantitative
measures such as Centralities, Clustering coefficients and indices. Once these measures
have been calculated, quite often, the analysis is still far from being over. Next, we demon-
strate the application of the complex network methods on two different case studies.
3.3 Case Study I: Agent-based Computing
The area of interest of the first case study is agent-based computing, a diverse research
domain concerned with the building of intelligent software based on the concept of
"agents". In the first case study, we perform Scientometric analysis to analyze all sub-
domains of agent-based computing. The data consists of 1,064 journal articles indexed in
the ISI web of knowledge published during a twenty year period: 1990-2010. These were
retrieved using a topic search with various keywords commonly used in sub-domains of
agent-based computing. The proposed approach employs a combination of two applica-
tions for analysis, namely Network Workbench and CiteSpace as mentioned earlier in
chapter 2. The idea is that Network Workbench allowed for the analysis of complex net-
work aspects of the domain whereas a detailed visualization-based analysis of the
bibliographic data was performed using CiteSpace. Results include the identification of the
largest cluster based on keywords, the timeline of publication of index terms, the core
journals and key subject categories. We also identify the core authors, top countries of
origin of the manuscripts along with core research institutes. Finally, the results have re-
vealed the strong presence of agent-based computing in a number of non-computing
related scientific domains including life sciences, ecological sciences and social sciences.
- 64 -
3.3.1 Problem Statement:
As discussed earlier in the previous chapter, agent-based computing encompasses
both multiagent systems as well as agent-based modeling. Agent design and simulation go
hand in hand but in completely different ways in different sub-domains of agent-based
computing. So, e.g. on one hand, there are researchers whose research goals revolve
around the design of various types of agents where the role of simulation is closely linked
to validation of the future operation of actual or physical agents[161]. On the other, there is
another group of researchers whose goal is not agent-design but rather the agent-design is a
means of developing simulations which can lead to better understanding of global or emer-
gent phenomena associated with complex adaptive systems[6], [141]. This broad base of
applications of this research area thus often leads to confusions regarding the exact seman-
tics of various terms in the literature. This is tied closely to the evolution of “agent-based
computing” into a wide assortment of communities. These communities have at times, per-
haps nothing other than the notion of an “agent” in common with each other.
The goal of the CNA here is to use network development, analysis and visualization
to give a Scientometric survey of the diversity and spread of the domain across its various
sub-domains, in general, and to identify key concepts, which are mutual to the various sub-
domains, in particular. These includes identifying such visual and Scientometric indicators
as the core journals, the key subject categories, some of the most highly cited authors, most
central authors, institutes of highly cited authors and the top countries of manuscript origin.
Our goal is to use a combination of two different tools based on their relative strengths;
Network Work Bench [87], [162] for performing a Complex Network Analysis
using Network Analysis Toolkit and CiteSpace[89].
The objectives of this study can be summarized as follows:
- 65 -
• To identify the largest clusters of inter-connected papers for the discovery of com-
plex interrelations of various sub-areas of agent-based computing.
• To discover “bursts”[163], [164] of topics along with a timeline of publication of
the index terms used.
• To identify the core journals for the whole of agent-based computing ranging from
agents, multi-agent systems to agent-based and individual-based simulations, in
terms of citations of articles.
• To identify the key subject categories.
• To identify and study the most productive authors, institutes and countries of manu-
script origins.
3.3.2 Methodology
In this section, we give an overview of the research methodology for the first case study.
While the overall methodology of any CNA is similar, there are always peculiarities of ap-
plication in each case study as well as each cas domain. As such this involved data retrieval
as well as subsequent CNA performed using the two separate tools. It is pertinent to note
here that this analysis might appear trivial and a simple application of the complex network
methods and software, however, the actual case is far from that. Simply finding and under-
standing the correct data tags for development of complex networks requires extensive
understanding of the data types and transformations. Thus the analyses in this chapter re-
flect the last iteration of the application of these methods rather than a simple and naïve
application of these tools. In addition, the datasets were time and again verified manually
and the data was collected initially by hand and consisted of several tens of thousands of
records. Subsequently the networks which are demonstrated here were developed however
again these are not the first networks which were developed. Network manipulation was
also applied extensively. In short, developing complex network models and pruning net-
- 66 -
works for custom application of Complex Network methods is a nontrivial task and takes
considerable time, effort and learning for each application. It is best learnt by practicing
and observing existing case studies, which is the reason we are demonstrating two different
case studies as a means of how other case studies can be applied using the proposed com-
plex network modeling level of the framework.
3.3.2.1 Data collection
The input data was retrieved using searches from the WOS [165]. A thorough topic
search for data was devised to cater for various aspects and keywords used in agent-based
computing in the following three sub-domains:
1. Agent-based, multi-agent based or individual-based models
2. Agent-oriented software engineering
3. Agents and multi-agent systems in AI
The search was performed in all four databases of Web of Science namely SCI-
EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI, CPCI-S for all years. Details of the search have been provid-
ed in the Appendix 1. For the sake of analysis, the range of years 1990-2010 was selected
with search limited to only Journal articles. Bibliographic records retrieved from SCI in-
clude information such as authors, titles, abstracts as well as references. The addition of
cited references resulted in a total of 32, 576 nodes. The details of the search keywords
along with reasoning for the selection are given in the Appendix 1.
3.3.3 Results
The results are presented starting with a basic look at the overall picture of articles re-
trieved from the Web of Science. As can be noted in Figure 11, the articles in this domain
start primarily during the early 1990’s and gradually keep rising and as such reach a total
of 148 articles published merely in the last year 2009.
- 67 -
Figure 11: Articles published yearly
In addition, since the popularity of a domain is known to be based on its number of cita-
tions, we need to observe this phenomenon closely. It can be observed in the graph using
data from the Web of Science in Figure 12. Thus, starting from a very small number of ci-
tations, Agent-based computing has risen to almost 1630 citations alone during the year
2009.
Figure 12: Citations per year
- 68 -
3.3.3.1 Network Workbench (NWB)
Next, to get the big picture of the citation network, a network (paper co-citation net-
work) was extracted from the ISI records using Network Workbench tool. In addition,
analysis was performed for the extracted network using NWB based Network Analysis
Toolkit [166]. The extracted global properties of the network are shown in Table 1. The
first thing to note here is the large number of nodes i.e. 32, 576 which appears much larger
than reported above from the Web of Science data. This is primarily because it includes the
cited references as well as the original nodes. Now, we see here that there are no isolated
nodes, which is obvious because every paper will at least cite some other papers at the very
least. This is followed by the 39, 096 edges. Another interesting feature is the average de-
gree, which we see is 2.4. The fact that the average degree is not significantly higher shows
actually that a large number of papers have been co-cited in this corpus otherwise the de-
gree would have been much higher.
The graph itself is not weakly connected but it consists of 78 weakly connected compo-
nents with a largest component of size 31,104 nodes. The weakly connected components
are formed based on articles connected with a small number of other articles identifying
the importance of these papers (Which shall be investigated in depth later on in this chap-
ter). Finally, we note that the density is 0.00004 however knowing the density does not
give much structural information about the Scientific domain per se. These properties are a
characteristic of the retrieved empirical data. However, we note here that while interesting,
they do not provide in depth insights of the data. So we perform a further set of analysis
using NWB
- 69 -
Table 1 Basic Network Analysis of Extracted Paper Citation Network
Attribute Value
Nodes: 32, 576
Isolated nodes: None
Edges: 39, 096
Self Loops None
Parallel Edges None
Edge Attributes None
Valued Network No
Average total degree: 2.400
Weakly Connected No
Weakly connected components 78
Largest connected component
Size
31, 104
nodes
Density (disregarding weights): 0.00004
Here the structure of the overall agent-based computing domain can be examined fur-
ther using NWB. To allow for the examination of the domain using the specific strengths,
central to the NWB tool, the top nodes were extracted using a local citation count > 20.
Subsequently the network was visualized using GUESS[167] and nodes were resized ac-
cording to the values of the citation count. The result can be observed in Figure 13. Here
we can note the peculiar relation of some of the top papers connected with Volker Grimm’s
paper in the center. Apart from Grimm’s own papers, these include Robert Axelrod’s as
well as Parker’s and Deangelis’s works. In addition, we can note that here Kreft’s and Hus-
ton’s work in Microbiology and Biosciences as well as Wooldridge’s and Ferber’s work in
the domain of multiagent systems are also showing up. For further analysis, we move on to
the more advanced Information Visualization tool, namely CiteScape.
- 70 -
Figure 13: Top papers with citations > 20
3.3.3.2 CiteScape
The CiteScape tool allows for a variety of different analysis. CiteScape directly operates
on the downloaded ISI data and builds various networks using time slicing. Subsequently
using the various options selected by the user, the network can then be viewed in different
ways and parameters can be analyzed based on centrality (betweenness) as well as fre-
quency.
3.3.3.2.1 Identification of the largest cluster
The goal of the first analysis was to observe the big picture and identify the most im-
portant indexing terms. Based on a time slice of one year, here in Figure 14, we see the
largest cluster.
These clusters are formed using CiteSpace, which analyzes clusters based on time slic-
es. Here the links between items show the particular time slices.
- 71 -
Figure 14: Largest Cluster based on indexing terms
In this figure, we first note the top where the year slices from 1990 to 2010 show up in 4
year slices. Using different colors in CiteSpace allows us to clearly identify turning points
and other interesting phenomena in literature. We notice here that one of Grimm’s papers is
actually the key turning point from Agent-based Modeling to Multiagent-systems cluster.
Another thing that can be noted here is the role of this paper in connecting a large number
of papers in 2010 to the other papers in 2002-2006 era showing a somewhat delayed ac-
ceptance of the concepts.
3.3.3.2.2 Timeline and bursts of index terms
The next analysis performed was to observe the clusters on a timeline as shown in Fig-
ure 15.
In complex networks, various types of centrality measures such as degree centrality, ec-
centricity, closeness and shortest path betweenness centralities etc. Citespace, in particular,
uses betweenness centrality[89]. As discussed in previous chapter, this particular centrality
is known to note the communication monitoring ability of a vertex for other network verti-
Grimm’s Ecological Modeling
- 72 -
ces. In other words, a higher centrality ensures that the vertex is between more of the
shortest paths between other nodes relative to other nodes with lower centrality.
Using a time line especially helps identify the growth of the field. Please note here that
these include papers which are based on agent-based computing as well as papers which
are cited by these papers. Here, the red items are the “bursts”. Bursts identify sudden inter-
est in a domain exhibited by the number of citations.
We can see that there are a lot of bursts in the domain of agent-based model. In addi-
tion, even the preliminary analytics and visualization here confirms the hypothesis that
agent-based computing has a very wide spread article base across numerous sub-domains.
This is obvious here as we see clusters ranging from “drosophila” and “yellow perch bio-
energetics” to those based on “group decision support systems”, all ranging from different
domains. Further analysis strengthens this initial point of view based on an examination of
the various clusters.
Here, the results demonstrate the effects of the semantic vagueness discussion earlier.
So, e.g. Where concepts such as group decision support system, rule-based reasoning and
coordination are concepts tied closely with developing intelligent agents, they also show
up in the domain right alongside agent-based modeling.
- 73 -
Figure 15: Timeline view of terms and clusters of index terms (based on centrality) also showing cita-
tion bursts
3.3.3.2.3 Analysis of Journals
Our next analysis was to identify the key publications of the domain3. This can be seen
in Figure 16. Here the key journals are identified based on their centrality.
Once again, we can note here that the vagueness in the terms of use again shows up in
the set of mainstream Journals of the domain with “Artificial Intelligence” and “Communi-
cations of the ACM” being relevant mostly to Agents associated with the concepts of
“Intelligent agents” and “Multiagent Systems” whereas “Econometrica”, “Ecological
Modeling” and the journal “Science” representing the “agent-based modeling” perspective.
3 It is pertinent to note here that we faced one peculiar problem in the analysis of the retrieved ISI data. The
Web of Science data identified a Journal named “Individual-based model”. However extensive searches
online did not find any such journal.
- 74 -
Figure 16: Key Journals based on centrality
In Table 2, we give details of these top journals based on centrality shown in the figure.
This represents the centrality of the top ten key journals. In terms of centrality, the “ECOL
MODEL” Journal has the highest value of centrality among all the journals. In addition,
here we observe that “ANN NY ACAD SCI”, “CAN J FISH AQUAT SCI”, “NATURE”
and the “ANN NY ACAD SCI” are also some of the top Journals of this domain in terms
of Centrality.
- 75 -
Table 2 Top Journals based on Centrality
Centrality Title Abbreviated Title
0.47 Ecological Modelling ECOL MODEL
0.29 Science SCIENCE
0.21 Communications of the ACM COMMUN ACM
0.32 Artificial Intelligence ARTIF INTELL and
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGE
0.15 Econometrica ECONOMETRICA
0.09 Journal of Theoretical Biology J THEOR BIOL
0.08 Canadian Journal of Fisheries
and Aquatic Sciences
CAN J FISH AQUAT
SCI
0.08 Nature NATURE
0.08 Annals of the New York Acad-
emy of Sciences
ANN NY ACAD SCI
Next, we analyze the publications in terms of their frequencies of publication as given
in Table 3. Now, interestingly, the table sorted in terms of article frequency, gives a slightly
different set of core journals. Through frequency analysis of the title words of 240 journals,
it can be seen that “ECOL MODEL” is still at the top with a frequency of 295 articles.
“NATURE” and “SCIENCE” follow with 231 and 216 published articles respectively. “J
THEO BIO” is next with 167 articles. Next “ECOLOGY” has published 145 articles. This
is followed by “AM NAT”, “TRENDS ECOL EVOL”, “LECT NOTES ARTIF INT” and
“P NATL ACAD SCI USA”.
- 76 -
Table 3 Core Journals based on frequency
Frequency Title Abbreviated Title
295 Ecological Modelling ECOL MODEL
231 Nature NATURE
216 Science SCIENCE
167 Journal of Theoretical Biology J THEOR BIOL
145 Ecology ECOLOGY
123 The American Naturalist AM NAT
121 Trends in Ecology & Evolution TRENDS ECOL EVOL
121 Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence LECT NOTES ARTIF INT
121 Proceedings of the National Academy of Scienc-
es
P NATL ACAD SCI USA
3.3.3.2.4 Analysis of Categories
Our next analysis was to discover the prevalence of various agent-based computing arti-
cles in various subject categories. This visualization is shown in Figure 17. The detailed
analysis of the subject category based on centrality follows in Table 4.
- 77 -
Figure 17: Complex network model of the category data
Table 4 Key categories based on Centrality
Centrality Category
0.44 Engineering
0.4 Computer Science
0.36 Mathematics4
0.34 Ecology
0.31 Environmental Sciences
0.14 Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology
0.13 Biology
0.13 Economics
0.12 Psychology
4 Shown as two categories erroneously by CiteScape
- 78 -
The table represents the centrality based ordering of the key subject categories. It is im-
portant to note here is that this table shows top categories from a total of 75 categories.
Here, it can be observed that in terms of centrality, the “Engineering” category leads other
categories. It is however, closely followed by computer science, mathematics, ecology and
environmental sciences. It appears however that the “Psychology” category has the lowest
value of centrality among all other categories.
For comparative analysis, we also analyze these categories using the publication fre-
quency of articles. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 5.
Table 5 Subject Categories according to frequency
Frequency Category
287 Computer Science
195 Ecology
145 Engineering
92 Social Sciences
66 Biology
57 Environmental Sciences
57 Mathematics
53 Environmental Studies
52 Operations Research & Management Science
52 Fisheries
The table represents the frequency of the top ten key categories. Through frequency
analysis of the title words of 75 categories, we interestingly come up with a slightly differ-
ent set of results. Here, “Computer Science” with a frequency of 287 articles leads the rest
and is followed closely by ecology and engineering. An interesting observation based on
the two tables is that there are certain categories which have relatively low frequency but
are still central (in terms of having more citations) such as Mathematics. Amongst the top
categories, we can also see categories with a relatively lower frequency such as 53 for
- 79 -
“Environmental Sciences” and 52 for “Operations Research & Management Science” as
well as “Fisheries”. This detailed analysis shows that prevalence of agent-based computing
is not based on a few sporadic articles in a variety of subject categories. Instead, there are
well-established journals and researchers with interest in and publishing a considerable
number of papers in this domain, especially agent-based modeling and simulation.
3.3.3.2.5 Bursts in subject categories
Next, we analyze how various subject categories have exhibited bursts. This is shown in
the Table 6. Here we can see that fisheries have the largest burst associated with the year
1991. Next are two closely related categories “Marine and Freshwater Biology” and
“Ecology” in the same time frame. One very interesting finding here is that there are a lot
of bursts in non-computational categories.
Table 6 Key bursts in subject categories
Burst Category Year
13.09 Fisheries 1991
10.3 Marine & Freshwater Biology 1991
9.36 Ecology 1991
5.58 Economics 1996
4.25 Evolutionary Biology 1993
3.76 Mathematics 1990
3.3 Genetics & Heredity 1993
3.2 Oceanography 1995
3.3.3.2.6 Analysis of Author Networks
In this section, we analyze the author co-citation networks. Figure 18 shows the visuali-
zation of the core authors of this domain. Here red color exhibits burst of articles and
- 80 -
concentric circles identify separation of years of publications. The size of these circles
based on the centrality values of the author. The blue is color represents the older papers
and the green gives not very old papers. Yellowish and reddish colors are for relatively
more recent publications. Here, the descriptions are based on the color figures, which can
be viewed in the online version of the paper, since Citespace, being a visualization tool,
relies extensively on the use of colors to depict styles.
Figure 18: Co-Author network visualization
Although this visualization perhaps gives a broad picture of the various authors, we also
present a detailed analysis of this data. This can be seen in a tabular form as shown in Ta-
ble 7. Here, we can observe that the top cited (most central) author is Don DeAngelis, a
Biologist. Don is followed by another Biologist Michael Huston. Next is Volker Grimm, an
expert in agent-based and individual-based modeling and Kenneth A Rose, an ecologist.
Next, we have Robert Axelrod, a Political Scientist. Nigel Gilbert, a Sociologist and Mike
Wooldridge, a Computer Scientist is next in the list. Finally, we have François Bousquet
from the field of Ecological Modeling (Agriculture) and Steven F. Railsback, an Ecologist.
This is quite an interesting result because agents and agent-based computing in general was
- 81 -
supposed to be primarily from Computer Science/AI and have very specific meanings.
However, the results show that it is actually quite prevalent and flourishing in an uninhibit-
ed manner in various other fields in terms of renowned (ISI-indexed) archival Journal
articles.
Table 7 Authors in terms of centrality
Centrality Author
0.5 DEANGELIS DL
0.33 HUSTON M
0.16 GRIMM V
0.08 ROSE KA
0.08 AXELROD R
0.07 GILBERT N
0.07 WOOLDRIDGE M
0.06 BOUSQUET F
0.06 RAILSBACK SF
For further comparative analysis, we plotted the top authors in terms of frequency of
publications. This is shown in Figure 19.
- 82 -
Figure 19: Authors in terms of frequency
The detailed analysis of the metrics of the key authors in this domain is shown in a tabu-
lar form in Table 8 in terms of their frequency of publication in the selected pruned
network.
Table 8 Top authors based on frequency
Frequency Author
128 GRIMM V
118 DEANGELIS DL
101 EPSTEIN JM
99 WOOLDRIDGE M
90 AXELROD R
83 GILBERT N
76 BOUSQUET F
68 HUSTON M
64 FERBER J
59 PARKER DC
It is important to note here that while the results are based on a total of 387 cited au-
thors, new names appear in this table such as Joshua M. Epstein, a Professor of Emergency
- 83 -
Medicine. Prof. Epstein is an expert in human behavior and disease spread modeling.
Jacques Ferber, a Computer Scientist is another new name in the list along with Dawn C.
Parker, an agricultural Economist.
3.3.3.2.7 Country-wise Distribution
Next, we present an analysis of the spread of research in agent-based computing origi-
nating from different countries based on centrality. Here, in Figure 20, we can see the
visualization of various countries. Please note here that the concentric circles of different
colors/shades here represent papers in various time slices (we have selected one year as
one time slice). The diameter of the largest circle thus represents the centrality of the coun-
try. Thus the visualization identifies the key publications in the domain to have originated
from the United States of America. This is followed by papers originating from countries
such as England, China, Germany, France and Canada.
Figure 20: Countries with respect to centrality
3.3.3.2.8 Analysis of Institutes
- 84 -
In this sub-section, we present visualization for a detailed analysis of the role of various
Institutes. We can see the temporal visualization of various institutes in the domain and the
assortment of popular keywords associated with them on the right in Figure 21.
Figure 21: Timeline based visualization of institutes
Here, the prevalence of manuscripts originating from the Oak Ridge National Laborato-
ries from the early 1990’s can be observed here. Next, we see papers from US Fish and
Wildlife services. Then, we can see papers from Kyushu University, Japan, University of
Birmingham, UK and French National Institute of Agricultural Research (INRA) close to
1998. From this time to 2000, a prevalent institute is Chinese University, Hong Kong. In
around 2002, the French institute Centre de coopération Internationale en recherche
agronomique pour le développement (CIRAD), an Institute of Agriculture Research for
Development is prevalent followed closely by a sister institute, the Institut de Recherche
pour le Développement (IRD). More recent newcomers to the field of agents include the
MIT and the Massachusetts General Hospital, associated with the Harvard University.
In the following Table 9, we perform an alternative analysis which is based instead
on the frequency of articles.
- 85 -
Table 9 Core Institutes based on frequency
Frequency Institute
11 University of Illinois, USA
10 INRA, France
9 University of Michigan, USA
9 University of Minnesota, USA
8 University of Sheffield, UK
8 Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
8 Italian National Research Council (CNR), Italy
8 Oak Ridge National Labs, USA
7 Harvard University, USA
7 MIT, USA
7 University of Washington, USA
7 University of Hong Kong, P. R. China
7 IRD, France
The Table 9 listed represents the top institutes in terms of frequency. It should be noted
that the frequency analysis was performed based on title words of a total of 328 institutes.
“University of Illinois”5 in general has a top ranking with a frequency of 11 articles. It is
followed closely by INRA (France) with a frequency of 10 articles. University of Michigan
and University of Minnesota, both from the US follow next with 9 articles each. With 8
articles each, next we have University of Sheffield (UK), Nanyang Technological Universi-
ty (Singapore), Italian National Research Council (CNR) and the Oak Ridge National Labs
(USA).
5 ISI data extracted using CiteSpace does not differentiate further as to which exact campus of the University
of Illinois is considered here (of the primarily three campuses i.e. UIUC, UIC, UIS.)
- 86 -
3.4 Case Study II: Consumer Electronics
The second case study demonstrates the application of the Complex Network methods
to scientific literature in the consumer electronics domain. As mentioned earlier at the start
of the chapter, while the first case study can be considered as an extension of the back-
ground of the previous chapter, the second case study can be considered as a proof-of-
concept of the generalized application of the complex network methods.
3.4.1 Problem Statement
Consumer electronics as a domain has evolved with the evolution of electronics tech-
nology [168]. The guiding principles for this gradual evolution range from consumer
demand[169] in general and the drive from the industry in particular[170]. Thus the state of
the domain, as it is today, reflects a number of trends from the past. To demonstrate the va-
riety of effects which can dictate trends, trends have been noted to be governed by
seemingly unrelated interactions such as a company’s internal management policies[171].
The evolution of the domain is perhaps reflected by its growth in terms of sales which if
aggregated, have shown to be almost exponential [172]. As evident from the analysis of the
Thomson Reuters citation data, a major evolution in the domain occurred during the last 25
years as the citation corpus does not reflect the indexing term of “consumer electronics” in
the WOS before this period.
Our research questions include the identification of the highly central journals in con-
sumer electronics. In addition, the analyses give results ranging from the identification of
the top authors and the top papers.
- 87 -
3.4.2 Methodology
Similar to the previous study on agent-based computing, citation data used here for the
identification of trends and interest of the general Consumer Electronics Community was
retrieved from the WOS using the topic “Consumer Electronics”. All available data sources
were used to get a complete picture of trends. These included the SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI,
A&HCI and the CPCI-S databases. The data was retrieved based on search on the “Con-
sumer Electronics” topic (which translates to a search including keywords, abstract, title
etc.) in addition to all records of the IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics. Subse-
quently, the data obtained from the ISI Web of Knowledge was imported and analyzed
primarily using various tools such as CiteSpace. First the data was spliced into yearly data.
Next, different co-citation networks were formed such as for Journals, authors and so on.
These were then analyzed based on both the frequency of publication as well as centrality
(in terms of being cited by others).
3.4.3 Results
The citation data was collected from all years including the current year (2010). The da-
ta included a total of 5,372 papers and including cited references, it amounted to 26,860
records.
Figure 22: Frequency of papers in Consumer Electronics domain
- 88 -
Figure 23 visualizes the top journals of the domain. Different colors (or scales of grey in
print) identify the year slices with each slice made up of ten years. The node sizes identify
the frequency of articles, which in essence is an indicator of trends or community interest.
The number of articles listed hailing from IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics
(CE) is 1665. The second Journal in the list is IEEE Transactions on Communications with
around one third number of the IEEE Transactions on CE articles (i.e. 560). Here the cen-
trality of the IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics is apparent here with the yellow
color representing the papers published in the nineties. The results for the top 10 Journals
are summarized in tabular form in Table 10.
Figure 23: Visualization of the citation network of the top Journals of the domain
- 89 -
Table 10 Top Journals in Consumer Electronics
Serial Journal Name
1. IEEE T CONSUM ELECTR
2. IEEE T COMMUN
3. IEEE T CIRC SYST VID
4. P IEEE
5. IEEE T IMAGE PROCESS
6. IEEE J SEL AREA COMM
7. IEEE COMMUN MAG
8. IEEE T CIRCUITS SYST
9. IEEE T BROADCAST
10. ELECTRON LETT
Here, we can note that Figure 24 gives the overall picture of the top papers of the do-
main/ Here, the size of the nodes and the font is scaled according to the higher value of the
centrality of the paper.
Figure 24: Network of top papers in Consumer Electronics
- 90 -
The Table 11 summarizes the top 10 papers of the IEEE Transactions on CE.
Table 11 Top papers of IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics
Serial Paper Citations
1. The JPEG2000 still image coding system: An overview (2000) 398
2. Pilot tone selection for channel estimation in a mobile OFDM system
(1998)
242
3. A new remote user authentication scheme using smart cards (2000) 192
4. An efficient remote use authentication scheme using smart cards
(2000)
147
5. Contrast enhancement using brightness preserving bi-histogram equal-
ization (1997)
127
6. The Trustworthy Digital Camera - Restoring Credibility To The Pho-
tographic Image (1993)
118
7. Channel estimation for OFDM systems based on comb-type pilot ar-
rangement in frequency selective fading channels (1998)
116
8. Digital Sound Broadcasting To Mobile Receivers (1989) 90
9. Multidirectional Interpolation For Spatial Error Concealment (1993) 87
10. A modified remote user authentication scheme using smart cards
(2003)
86
Subsequently we can note the co-citation network of the key authors in the consumer
electronics domain in Figure 25. Note that while we have discussed and analyzed similar
results in the previous case study in considerably more details, here we only briefly discuss
them because this case study is a demonstration of the generalized applicability of the
methodology.
- 91 -
Figure 25: Co-citation network in Consumer Electronics
3.5 Summary of results
In this chapter, we presented the generalized ideas related to complex network modeling
followed by two case studied of different types of complex interaction data. The goal of the
case studies was to demonstrate how complex network modeling level of the proposed
framework can be exploited to discover patterns of emergence in different entities consti-
tuting a cas. The two case studies were chosen based on the appropriate availability of
interaction data from a well-structured data source i.e. the WOS. In this section, results of
the two case studies are correlated with the general theme of complex network modeling
level in the form of a set of summarized results.
- 92 -
3.5.1 Case Study I
In this case study, analysis was performed using different types of entities and their in-
teractions in the agent-based computing domain.
Firstly, during the analysis conducted using Network Workbench, the top cited papers of
the domain was identified from both the multiagent side of the domain (based in Computer
Sciences) in addition to the agent-based modeling ideas (from ecology/social sciences).
Next, using a clustering of index terms, the ideas were identified to originate from the
agent-based modeling area. A major recent “turning point” signifying a trend was next
identified based on some of Grimm’s papers. An older identified turning point was based
on Goldberg’s 1989 paper on Genetic Algorithms, which tied in with the ecological cluster
labeled as “Cannibalism”. In addition, the prevalence of the “catchment” cluster was noted
identifying the social aspects coupled with the “increasing returns” cluster identifying eco-
nomics. Thus one single extracted network was able to demonstrate how these diverse
areas are tied in together by means of identification of emergent patterns. The “persis-
tence” cluster again identifies a “multiagent” related set of documents. Here, the oldest
cluster is the “life history” cluster with roots in Biosciences. This strong intermingling of
ideas can be noted to have autonomously guided the evolution of the agent-based compu-
ting domain. Whereas subsequent analyses only prove the point that there is further
diversity in each of subject categories, authors, institutions and countries. However, while
the domain has strong footing, being able to use visualization has allowed the examination
of various complex interactions of the sub-domains, which would not have otherwise been
possible to monitor without the use and application of network extraction, modeling and
manipulation techniques.
- 93 -
3.5.2 Case Study II
In this case study, a complex network modeling and analysis of the consumer electron-
ics domain has been performed. Using centrality measures has allowed a visual and
quantitative identification of the top journals, the top authors as well as the top research
papers in the consumer electronics scientific domain.
3.6 Broad applicability of the proposed framework level
In this section, an overview of how the proposed framework level can be used to con-
duct different complex network modeling based cas research studies is presented. It can be
noted from the two case studies conducted in this chapter that each application domain in
complex network modeling can have slightly different idiosyncrasies. However, complex
network methods are suitable only in the case where specific target data is either readily
available or else such data can be extracted by some means. This interaction data must
primarily allow the creation of complex networks. In other words, the data columns must
point out relationships between individual columns. Using these relationships, complex
networks need to be designed and extracted. At times, the extracted networks contain con-
siderably more information than needed. As such, it can be difficult to study the emergent
patterns. As such, network nodes and links might need to be selectively eliminated or else
new nodes and links might need to be developed inside the network. In addition, different
network measures might need to be calculated for loading on to the different nodes and
links. Based on these manipulations, the network nodes might also have to be selectively
configured to display difference in terms of size, color or shape etc. In addition, different
clustering algorithms might be applied to select clusters of nodes based on a common set
of criteria. Subsequently network analysis might have to be repeatedly performed till a
suitable network emerges allowing the studying of interactions of the various cas compo-
nents.
- 94 -
While the cas methods in this chapter have been applied in the domain of citation data,
the primary reason for this selection has been the stable and verified nature of this data. In
other words, the methods used for CNA are equally applicable to different types of cas data
ranging from social sciences (using survey instruments to develop relationship data etc.),
biological sciences (such as using biological genomic databases) and telecommunication
complex networks (using topological connectivity models of different nodes and peers in
the communication network).
3.7 Conclusions
In this chapter, we have demonstrated the use of the proposed complex network model-
ing level of the framework using two different case studies. The use of Complex Network
Analysis is shown to allow for the identification of emergent behavioral patterns in large
amounts of citation data. Using two separate case studies in the domain of Agent-based
computing and Consumer Electronics, the results demonstrate the effectiveness of the pro-
posed approach. Results included identifying the key patterns and Scientometric indicators
in research such as key authors, papers, Journals and institutions as well as the temporal
aspects underlying the evolution of the entire agent-based computing scientific domain and
sub-domains. In the next chapter, we present the exploratory agent-based modeling level of
the proposed framework i.e. exploratory agent-based modeling for performing feasibility
studies in multidisciplinary cas research.
- 95 -
4 Proposed Framework: Exploratory Agent-based
Modeling Level
In the previous chapter, we gave an overview of the development of complex network
models for cas based on the availability of real-world data by using two separate case stud-
ies. We discovered that by the use of complex networks, we could perform CNA of the
data and discover interesting trends in the data such as finding emergent patterns. While in
the ideal world, we would have all types of interaction data for cas, practically speaking
most cas case studies suffer from a lack of suitable data for developing complex network
models. As such, the rest of the framework modeling levels are concerned with the devel-
opment of agent-based models of cas. While agent-based models of cas are simulation
models, they do not fit in line with the traditional simulation models of engineered sys-
tems. As noted earlier in previous chapters, similar to the complex network modeling level
of the proposed framework, exploratory ABM level is also an encompassing level. In other
words, while on one hand, it is a part of the proposed framework, it allows other existing
studies of legacy ABMs to be tied in with the proposed framework. In the next section, we
develop a proposed methodology of performing exploratory agent-based modeling.
4.1 Research Methodology
Exploratory agent-based models are models which are developed by researchers to
explore the concepts underlying the cas under study. The goals of developing these models
are typically different from traditional computer simulation models such as involving queu-
ing, Monte Carlo methods etc. Some of the possible goals of building exploratory agent-
based models can be listed as follows:
- 96 -
1. The researchers want to explore if agent-based modeling is a suitable paradigm for
modeling their particular problem.
2. The researchers want to develop a proof of concept that any further research in the
chosen direction would be a viable possibility.
3. The researchers want to develop agent-based models as a means of demonstrating
the applicability of the chosen model design of a cas system to prospective funding
bodies.
4. The researchers want to develop agent-based models to explore exactly what kind
of data would be needed for the sake of validation of these models without spend-
ing considerable amount of time on these models.
As we can note here, these models are at times not meant to be comprehensive or ex-
pected to give high quality research results. However, these models do allow the
researchers to test the water and thus increase the possibility of proceeding on a larger-
scale future project.
The most basic type of agent-based modeling can be considered as the exploratory
agent-based modeling level as shown in Figure 26. This framework level is suitable for ex-
ploratory agent-based model design and development. While a number of researchers are
known to follow exploratory agent-based modeling, previously the concept has not been
formalized in a unified framework. The idea originated based on extensive observation of
published cas models by researchers who like to first test the water and develop proof of
concept models for further research. These models can be useful for assessing feasibility as
well as for demonstrating how future research might be conducted. At this stage, these
models do not have to be developed according to any detailed specification or even lead to
any interesting results. Their goal is often to pave the way for future research by develop-
ing a proof of concept model. This frees the researcher to explore the cas domain and
- 97 -
attempt to develop different models without any pressure. A large number of existing cas
models can be considered as exploratory and thus come under exploratory agent-based
modeling level of the proposed framework.
Figure 26 Exploratory agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework (to assess research fea-
sibility and proof-of-concept)
One possible way of evaluating the success of exploratory ABMs and their associated
problems is to examine the communication of various cas researchers. With the wide avail-
ability of open mailing lists for various agent-based modeling toolkits such as NetLogo,
Repast-S, Mason and Swarm, such an observational approach is quite possible. While
there are several mailing lists and tools, specifically we focus on NetLogo. There are sev-
- 98 -
eral reasons for selecting NetLogo. Among other things, Railsback et al. notes NetLogo as
the highest documented tool from the rest of the ABM tools[173]. They also highly rec-
ommend it for prototyping (exploratory) complex models as follows:
“NetLogo is the highest-level platform, providing a simple yet powerful programming
language, built-in graphical interfaces, and comprehensive documentation. It is designed
primarily for ABMs of mobile individuals with local interactions in a grid space, but not
necessarily clumsy for others. NetLogo is highly recommended, even for prototyping com-
plex models.”
In this chapter, using a case study from the domain of complex communication net-
works, the application of exploratory agent-based modeling has been demonstrated. This
proposed real-world application is based on coupling a set of P2P unstructured network
search algorithms with household devices communicating with each other for intelligent
discovery of user content in an “Internet of things”.
The rest of the chapter is structured as follows:
We first give an overview of the selected case study along with a problem definition.
Next, we present the design and implementation details of the exploratory agent-based
models. Subsequently we discuss the results of the simulation experiments. Finally we
conclude the chapter.
4.2 Case Study: Overview, Experimental design and Implementation
The chosen case study is the modeling and simulation of computing devices self-
organizing themselves to develop a complex communication network infrastructure. Tech-
nically this is called the “Internet of things” [174] and the idea was initially introduced in
1999 by Kevin Ashton[34]. The basic idea is given as follows in Kevin’s own words:
- 99 -
“We need to empower computers with their own means of gathering infor-
mation, so they can see, hear and smell the world for themselves, in all its random
glory. RFID and sensor technology enable computers to observe, identify and un-
derstand the world—without the limitations of human-entered data.”
The reason we are exploring this case study is that, to the best of our knowledge, there
is no previous case study exploring the use of agent-based modeling in the domain of “In-
ternet of things”. Here, the goal is to firstly understand how agent-based modeling might
be able to perform exploratory studies for the Internet of things. Secondly, this case study
will also allow the use of extensive modeling and simulation demonstrating how explorato-
ry case studies might be effective in the domain of studying new types of cas.
While internet of things is a very interesting concept in theory, till now, there have not
been many practical applications. One possible reason of a lack of such applications is the
inability of current modeling and simulation tools to model and combine different types of
paradigms. As an example, as discussed in Chapter 2, while simulators are available to
model peer-to-peer networks such as Oversim[155] and there are other simulators such as
NS2 and OMNET++ suitable for the modeling and simulation of wireless sensor networks,
practically it can tend to be very difficult, if not impossible, to combine two or more differ-
ent paradigms in a single simulator without massive re-factoring of the simulator source
code. In other words, to the best of our knowledge, existing simulators do not effectively
allow the combination and application of protocols, ideas and entities from different com-
plex communication networks domain. In addition, what is even harder to model is
mobility because none of the previously well-known simulators handle mobility well. As
an example, in traditional simulators, the locations of nodes are typically defined in the
start of the simulation experiments. As such it is difficult to model the effects of Brownian
random motion and other mobility models.
- 100 -
As such, here the goal is to explore the use of agent-based modeling and simulation in
this domain and combine concepts from P2P networks along with the concepts of Wireless
Sensor Networks to develop a working simulation of the internet of things. The specific
problem that we attempt to solve using agent-based modeling and simulation is defined as
follows:
Existing computing media devices both have internet capabilities as well as file storage
capabilities for various types of contents and media. However, a user who keeps a set of
devices can have difficulty in locating e.g. a particular file from their various computing
devices (such as Smart phones, Laptops, and other devices). In other words, we want to
explore further how P2P search algorithms can be exploited for exploring these media de-
vices for locating user files. Here are a few possible use case scenarios for such algorithms:
A. In an ambient assisted living initiative, consumer mobile phones can communicate
with each other to discover internet access which then provides access to content
from customized web services.
B. Julie is late for her meeting, gets in her car and realizes that she has forgotten her
important files on one of her home computers. Using her mobile phone, she is able
to perform a P2P search of her personal devices which connect with each other se-
curely and she is able to access content from the computer in which she had left her
files. This autonomous self-adapting hybrid network does not require prior configu-
ration except any security measures that Julie has previously configured (such as
the use of digital certificates for authentication and authorization of the devices).
C. Joe is in a meeting and Rick, his boss wants him to disseminate the meeting agenda
to all the meeting participants on their local trusted phones. Joe’s phone is able to
connect to other local phones without using the internet, which Rick rightfully con-
siders not secure enough for confidential company internal documents. As a
- 101 -
company policy, Rick and all participants are using mobile phones which are not al-
lowed internet access on company facilities. In other words, the devices form an
internet of things to disseminate information.
D. In a media company, it has taken months to arrange a meeting for the busy ad de-
signers with their clients in a nice comfy mountain resort. They are all sitting in
various rooms discussing agendas. Mary has an important clip in her phone but the
size of the clip is very large for uploading and downloading from the internet. She
wants to share the clip with other designers. However, these other attendees are nei-
ther tech savvy enough, nor have high speed internet for fast sharing. She needs to
disseminate the clip inside the room as well as in another room. Her phone recog-
nizes other devices as she gives the phone the names of the trusted phones and she
is able to send it. People in the same room receive the clip using faster transfer over
local wireless network autonomously developed by the P2P applications while de-
vices in the other room receive the clip both via the internet of things by using
phones of meetings organizers in the hallways without requiring extensive configu-
ration settings or using the internet.
Other use cases showing the utility of P2P algorithms coupled with wireless sensor
networks in the domain of internet of things can be observed in Figure 27. As can be seen,
applications can range from real-time weather monitoring, patient monitoring, business
meetings, currency rates, condition monitoring of all of the family cars etc.
- 102 -
Figure 27: Examples of Internet of Things
In Figure 28, we can note some of the challenges in the design of hybrid networks
which involve local as well as remote content access. Content can be accessed using two
primary models. One is the Push model where content is automatically accessed on the de-
vices by being “pushed” form other devices while in the “pull” model, the content is
accessed by performing queries. P2P access is based on unstructured and structured over-
lay methods. In structured overlays, there is typically a Distributed Hash Table (DHT)
which allows for indexing of content to a certain degree whereas unstructured overlay net-
works involve the use of algorithms which can access content without a structured
network.
- 103 -
Figure 28: Challenges in hybrid network design for Internet of things by using unstructured P2P algorithms
for searching content in personal computing devices
4.2.1 Goals definition
The key goal in this exploratory agent-based modeling case study is to develop an ex-
ploratory model for studying the feasibility of the proposed design of hybrid complex
communication networks. By means of proposing an algorithm Self-Advertising Content
Sources (SACS) which is similar to dropping bread crumbs around a house for locating
content sources, each content source sends a message with a certain numeric value in its
immediate vicinity. This gradient establishment process is demonstrated in Figure 29. Here
S represents the content source. This could be a personal computer, a mobile phone or
some other device. The other square tiles represent other computing devices located near-
by. Now, how it can be physically implemented is by means of having S first locate other
wireless communication devices within its immediate access based on its communication
Consumer net-
work content
Content Retrieval
(Pull)
Content or in-
formation
Dissemination (Push)
From local net-
work
Retrieval Via the
web
To local net-
work
Via the web
Unstructured or struc-
tured overlay network
From a P2P
Shared network
Unstructured or struc-
tured overlay network
To a peer on the
web
Unstructured
overlay
To a peer in anoth-
er consumer network
Structured over-
lay
From another con-
sumer network
- 104 -
radius. These devices are then sent the gradient establishment message. Once the message
reaches these devices, being the first in the vicinity, these devices keep the counter of the
message and are shown by a 1 in the figure. These devices next search for other devices
and send the messages but with a lower SACS value. This process continues till the SACS
distance limit expires for the message in which case, it is not re-sent or else there is no oth-
er communication device within the communication radius.
Figure 29 Establishment of a gradient by SACS sources
Subsequently after the establishment of a gradient, devices can query other devices in
the P2P Internet of thing network. This is possible with the help of a TTL based algorithm
as depicted in Figure 30. As can be seen, to avoid unnecessary flooding of the surround-
ings, the queries keep moving forward based on the gradient value. So, essentially the
queries are able to locate content sources because they always move to a computing device
with a lower gradient value.
- 105 -
Figure 30 Query algorithm flowchart
4.2.2 Agent design
As discussed earlier in the previous chapters, Agent-based models have been used in a
large variety of application domains. While some application domains involving social
simulations, such Agents in Computational Economics (ACE) depict reproducibility, eco-
nomic benefits and social interests, these descriptions are not inherent to agent-based
design per se and are domain specific. As such, here we give detailed descriptions of agent-
based models using various detailed design diagrams and implementation details in the
complex adaptive communication networks domain using a case study of the Internet of
things.
- 106 -
The agents in this simulation exploration are of two primary types:
1. Computing devices.
2. Message agents which are of two types
a. Query Message agents.
b. SACS setup message agents.
The detailed design description of these agents is given below:
4.2.2.1 Computing device agents
These agents are designed to simulate various types of computing devices. The devices
can range from mobile phones, handheld games as well as laptop computers to stationary
computers. As such, there are the basic design requirements for these agents that can be
listed as follows:
A. The agents must have a certain amount of memory to hold certain information.
B. In addition, these agents must be able to communicate with other agents in a certain
communication radius.
C. The agents must be able to perform basic computations (such as retrieval of data
from storage or using data structures).
The state chart diagram describes the Computing device agents. It is pertinent to note
here that some of the computing device agents need to be considered as gateway agents.
The idea of gateway agents is that in case the internet of things based algorithm (SACS) is
unable to locate certain content or information locally, then it should be possible for mes-
sage agents to find specific devices which are configured as gateway devices. These
computing devices are essentially useful for allowing the local P2P network to extend its
reach to the larger set of devices. As an example a person can have multiple devices at
home as well as office. If the person requires a certain file, the search query can execute
first locally in the vicinity of the house and if the query cannot locate the file, the search
- 107 -
messages need to be routed on through a gateway node to the office gateway machine
which will look for the required content/file in the office devices.
Figure 31 State chart for Computing device agent
The second type of computing device agents is the SACS source agents. The key idea is
that each content source self-organizes its surroundings by dropping bread-crumbs for en-
ticing query agents. The way it actually would be implemented in physical devices can be
described as follows:
1. First the device sends a message within its communication radius. This message is
basically a Hello message for finding out what is the list of active neighbor compu-
ting devices within communication range.
2. Next, these devices respond back to the sender giving their IDs.
3. The IDs of the neighbor devices are stored by the sender computing device.
4. Next, the sender device broadcasts the SACS setup message agent after assigning a
TTL value to it. The reason for first finding the neighbor devices instead of an ini-
- 108 -
tial broadcast is that the device must be sure that there are any active listening
computing devices before it repeatedly sends these messages.
5. On receiving the message agent, the neighbor devices can subsequently forward the
message based on the policy of the message agent, which will be described below.
Next, we discuss the design of the Message agents.
4.2.2.2 Message Agent
Here we discuss the design of the message agents. Message agents are of two types. The
first type is the SACS setup message agents and the second type is the query agents. Un-
like the computing device agent, it has been primarily designed for forwarding the message
agents, message agents themselves need to act more intelligently. Next, a description of
both these types of message agents is given as follows:
1. SACS setup message agents are responsible for setting up a gradient in the vicinity
of the SACS source nodes. As described above, these agents help establish a gradi-
ent starting from the initial communication radius of the SACS source node agents.
SACS setup agents have a simple task to perform. Once they are on a specific de-
vice, they use the algorithm described in Figure 30 to hop from one device to the
next. This is done by means of counting the distance (radius) by means of a hop
count. As a result when the hop value reaches the end of the SACS radius, it im-
plies the end of the line for the SACS setup process. However, during each hop, the
agents also communicate their respective hop count value to the computing device
agent, on which they are currently located. As such, the computing device agent
stores this information locally for future queries. It is important to note here that
SACS gradient can be established from a smaller radius to a large radius, where the
radius here would be used in terms of communication hop counts. In case of small-
er radii, there are chances that subsequently when queries are looking for a
- 109 -
particular content source, they might spend a long time hopping randomly before
they can locate a particular SACS gradient “scent” i.e. the hop value bread-crumbs
left over by the SACS setup message agent in the initial phase.
2. The second type of message agents is the Query agent type. The goals of the query
message agents are different from the SACS setup message agents. The query
agents are initiated by a user logged on to one of the computing devices. As such,
the goal of the query agent is to look for information. Now, the interesting thing to
note here is that according to the small world complex network theory, a large
number of real-world networks have nodes which can locate most other nodes us-
ing a small number of hops. As such, when an owner of a set of devices is looking
for specific information, chances are that the query would be able to locate this
content on one of the computers locally or within a few hops away from the person.
Query agents are thus responsible for content location discovery based on the
“smell” of the content discovered by means of the bread-crumb values dropped by
the previous SACS setup messages during the initial setup phase.
4.2.3 Learning and adaptation in the system
As discussed in detail in the last two chapters, unlike traditional agents involved in mul-
tiagent systems, the agents in the simulation design here do not individually have
intelligence and adaptation capabilities. However, the system as a whole has significant
adaptation capabilities. Thus the nonlinear interactions of the different agents allow the en-
tire system to emanate emergent behavior. The emergent behavior in this case is the
discovery of content using the bread-crumbs in content vicinity spread earlier during the
course of the execution of the distributed SACS setup algorithm. Here it can be noted that
the bread crumbs are established here in a completely self-organized manner. Thus every
particular assembly of computing devices will establish a completely new gradient and
- 110 -
each case of randomly walking queries will behave differently. However irrespective of
any variation in the configuration SACS algorithms need to be to be able to locate the re-
quired content sources.
4.2.4 Implementation description
Here, we describe the implementation details in the NetLogo tool. The model has been
implemented in a modular fashion and is described as follows:
4.2.4.1 Global variables
Firstly, the global variables depict some of the metrics which need to be collected over
the due course for the simulation experiments. There are three key desired global output
variables here:
1. The number of successful queries.
2. The total number of queries.
3. The total communication cost
In addition, there are several other input variables from the user interface which can be
adjusted by the user either manually or else by using behavior space experiments as shown
in Figure 32.
4.2.4.2 Breeds
The “aggregation” basic of cas, as discussed earlier in chapter 2, can be noted here in
this model. With the help of using two different types of agent breeds developed in the
netlogo model, aggregation can be noted. These breeds can be described as follows:
1. Nodes breed
This breed depicts the computing devices in the simulation. It has its own set of
internal variables. These variables are of two types. The first ones are Boolean vari-
ables which determine the type of the node. These include whether or not, it is a
- 111 -
gateway node, a query node, a goal node (i.e. a content source) and whether or not
it has been previously explored till now. The other type of internal variable for the
node is the SACS distance. This is the variable which is updated based on the hop
distance i.e. gradient from the SACS nodes. SACS nodes are the nodes with the
value of the Boolean variable goal? being true.
Figure 32: User interface showing various configurable values for the simulation
2. The second breed is for the messaging agents. These have been implemented as the
“Query” breed. These agents have three internal variables for storing their state.
Firstly, they have a variable which aggregates the current node agent, on which
they are located. The third variable inside the query agents gives the concept of se-
lective lookup by noting the particular type of content which this agent is searching
for. As can be noted, both of these concepts represent the cas internal model basic
concept as discussed earlier in Chapter 2.
- 112 -
After a discussion of the breeds developed in the agents, we next move to the imple-
mentation of the various procedures:
4.2.4.3 Setup
The first function is the “setup” and allows the creation of the entire scenario for further
simulation of the model. The overall setup function is shown in following Figure 33.
Figure 33: Description of the setup function
Here, we can note that the first part of the setup function is to clear all variables, agents
and the environment of the simulation. This is important especially when multiple simula-
tions are to be executed with the passage of time. The second part of the setup is related to
making the computing agents. This function is related to constructing the computing device
agents in the simulation. After the creation of the computing devices, the gateway nodes
are next selected based on the input parameters. Finally, these gateway nodes adjust in
- 113 -
terms of their locations in the Simulation world. The detailed description of each of these
functions follows along with other functions.
4.2.4.4 Make Computing Agents
This function is essentially the base for developing the computing agents according to
the input variables. This procedure is based on invoking the patches in the NetLogo world.
First of all, each patch creates a random number between 0 and 100. Next, this number is
compared with the probability assigned via a global input variable. Based on a comparison
of these two numbers, the patch might sprout an agent at this location. Next, the agent is
initialized with certain values. Initially, the agent is given an unexplored status. The sacs
distance is assigned equal to the sacs radius input global variable. Initially all nodes are
given “false” as the Boolean value for both the start as well as the goal and the gateway
variables. The shapes of the computing devices are next adjusted to be squares and they are
slightly randomly moved to ensure that most devices will not cover up over previous de-
vices.
4.2.4.5 Make Gateway nodes
This function is concerned with creating the gateway nodes from the previously created
computing device node agents. The working is based on a random selection of agents from
these devices. The number of agents which are to be created as the gateway nodes is based
on a global input variable. After making the node as gateway, its color is changed to yellow
so that it is visible in the overall landscape.
4.2.4.6 Adjust locations
This function asks each gateway node agent to perform certain tasks. First of all, the
agent looks in its immediate location and notes if there are any other agents there. If it
finds other agents located at the exact spot, the gateway node agent starts adjusting its loca-
- 114 -
tion slightly. It executes a conditional loop and keeps taking a random turn and moving
very slight till it is not immediately over another computing node. This exercise is im-
portant for both visualization as well as verification of the correct behavior in the case of
execution of large scale simulations. The effects of the setup give a screen view as shown
in Figure 34.
Figure 34: Effects of the execution of the setup function with 2500 computing devices
Note here that the square computing device agents have self-organized themselves
based on simple rules resulting in a more realistic pattern. In addition, all gateway nodes
are now completely visible on the screen.
4.2.4.7 Searches
The “Searches” function has primarily got the task to repeatedly call make-search func-
tion. The number of times this function is called is again configurable from the User
- 115 -
interface. This is a global variable slide which takes input from the user in terms of manual
execution for the number of searches to be created randomly.
4.2.4.8 Make Search
“Make search” function has two basic tasks. Firstly it randomly selects a computing de-
vice node agent. However, this selection is based on the criteria that the selected random
node agent must not previously be a gateway node. It then calls the make-s-node function.
4.2.4.9 Make-s-Node
This function is the actual function which creates the search node. The first thing that
this function does is to change the “start?” Boolean variable to true. It thus tags the node as
the location of the starting point of the queries. It also changes the color of the node to blue
and its shape to a circle so that these nodes are visually recognizable. The location of the
computing node is then stored in a temporary value. Afterwards, it executes the hatching of
k query agents. These query agents are needed for the “k-random walker” algorithm from
the domain of unstructured P2P networks. For each of the query agents, it calls a setup-
query function.
4.2.4.10 Setup-query
This function is called from the Make-s-node function. The goal of this function is to
properly assign values to the query agents. After making the query agents a circle and as-
signing them green color, the function increments the total query count global variable.
The query variable “loc” is next assigned an agentset made up of the agent where it is cur-
rently located.
- 116 -
4.2.4.11 Goals
The “Goals” function repeatedly executes the Make-goal function. Here the n-cs global
variable essentially reflects the total number of content sources which is another global in-
put variable.
4.2.4.12 Make-Goal
This function has got two main tasks. First, it selects nodes which are neither gateways,
nor start nodes for queries. Secondly, it asks each of these nodes to execute the make-g-
node function.
4.2.4.13 Make-g-Node
This function is called only to have a centralized location for changing the attributes to
each goal node i.e. a content source. Unlike most other functions in the simulation, this
function is quite simple and only sets the goal Boolean variable to true in addition to
changing the color of the node to red.
After calling setup, Searches and Goals functions, the screen now looks as shown in
Figure 35.
4.2.4.14 Setup-sacs
“Setup-sacs” is the key function in the SACS setup algorithm. It is used to firstly locate
each of the goal nodes. Once all the nodes have been located, they are all asked to execute
setup-sacs-d function in the turtle context.
- 117 -
Figure 35: View of the screen after the execution of the setup, Searches and the Goals functions
4.2.4.15 Setup-sacs-d
“Setup-sacs-d” simulates the entire SACS setup algorithm. It is also a recursive algo-
rithm but unlike traditional recursive algorithms, it is an agent-based distributed recursive
algorithm. In other words, it executes on other agents. So, it essentially calls itself repeat-
edly till the SACS gradient is properly setup in the communication radius of each content
source. Like all recursive algorithms, it needs to have a stopping condition. The stopping
condition here is a complex stopping condition. It can be considered as a disjunction of two
separate conditions. Firstly the algorithm will stop if there are no other “unexplored” com-
puting nodes in its vicinity. Secondly, it will also stop if the calling argument “d” is greater
than the global variable “sacs-radius”. The “sacs-radius” global input variable is again con-
figurable by means of a slider. The way this algorithm works is that first of all it equates
the sacs-distance value to the minimum one as compared to the previous value. It then
changes the label of the current computing node agent to reflect this sacs-distance value. It
- 118 -
also makes the explored? Boolean variable true. If the sacs-distance is non-zero, it changes
the color of the node to grey. This way, the content sources are the only ones which will
visually stand out from the other nodes. After setting these basic attributes, it compares the
current argument “d” with the sacs-radius global variable. If d is less than or equal to this
value, it creates a new agentset. This agentset is formed of all other nodes in a certain
communication radius but based on a condition of being unexplored till now. The commu-
nication radius is again a configurable value “sens-radius”. Now, this agentset is not
guaranteed to be non-empty so it is tested for emptiness. If non-empty, each of these agents
is asked to execute the same function again but with an incremented “d” value. Thus this
process can continue till the SACS gradient is properly setup around all SACS content
sources reflecting how the content sources can be Self-advertising their contents.
Afterwards, the simulation screen can be observed to reflect this setup as shown in Fig-
ure 36.
Figure 36: Result of execution of SACS setup algorithm
- 119 -
4.2.4.16 Move
This is the main function for the execution of the algorithm for queries as shown in Fig-
ure 37. The function itself is focused purely on the execution based on the existence of
query agents. If any queries are there, it will continue by asking them to execute move-rw
function otherwise it will terminate.
Figure 37 Flowchart for move function.
4.2.4.17 Move-rw
This is the main function for the execution of the algorithm for queries as shown in Fig-
ure 38. Here, we can note that the function executes by first creating a list of all nodes in
the given sensing radius. This radius is basically equal in physical terms to the communica-
tion radius. As an example, in case of Bluetooth networks, it will be different as compared
- 120 -
to Wi-Fi networks. In case there are no other devices in range, the query agent will simply
die. If there are other devices, the next step is choosing one of the nodes as the next loca-
tion. This is performed differently based on what is the selected mode of movement of
queries from the user interface. Based on the Boolean variable “sacs?” the next node is ei-
ther a random node in the case of a false value for this variable, or else one of the nodes
with minimum of “sacs-dist” variable. Note that this represents the gradient previously es-
tablished by the SACS nodes. As such, once this node is selected, the query agent can
firstly move to the selected node. Next, it can update its internal variables such as TTL val-
ue by decrementing it and also storing the tagged location node inside the “loc” variable.
After moving and updating these values, it needs to calculate the cost associated with this
move. If the location is a gateway node, then the move will incur cost equal to “gw-cost”, a
user input configurable variable otherwise the cost will simply be incremented by 1. Final-
ly before this function terminates, a call is made to the checkgoal function, which is
explained next.
4.2.4.18 Check-Goal
This function is primarily for goal verification for queries. In this function, the query
checks whether it has reached either one of a gateway node or else a content source (goal
node). If the current location agent satisfies either of these conditions, then the overall
number of successful queries is incremented and then the query agent terminates itself. If it
has not reached the goal nodes, then again it checks its TTL value. In case, the TTL value
has reached zero, then again it dies.
- 121 -
4.2.4.19 Move-Devices
This function is to test the effects of mobility of devices on sacs. It randomly moves a
percentage of the devices over time and when devices are out of range, it calls setup-sacs
again to reset the sacs setup messages.
Figure 38: Flow chart for the move-rw function
4.3 Simulation Results and discussion
The goal here is to use agent-based modeling to develop working proof of concept
models for modeling these concepts. Thus while small scale computing devices can be
hand-simulated and might appear to be a trivial exercise which can be performed on a
piece of paper, the specific goal of using agent-based modeling here is to be able to exam-
ine how this concept will work in the case of say hundreds of computing devices in say, a
small community or a small town. The proof of concept models will allow us to examine
the results based on hundreds of simulation runs. Thus it will allow us to discover the
strengths and weaknesses, if any, of the SACS mechanism. By using extensive parameter
sweeping, the simulation experiments should give a strong case for developing further
- 122 -
models of SACS or else to abandon the concept if it does not scale for larger and more re-
alistic settings of large-scale communication networks.
4.3.1 Metrics used
The input parameters and the outcomes of the simulation will be measured using the
key metrics given as follows:
4.3.1.1 Simulation parameters:
The input metrics to the simulation are as follows:
1. The number of computing devices used in the simulation
2. The number of content sources ncs
3. The number of gateway nodes ngw
4. The number of query source nodes nsrc
5. Number of random walkers per source node krw
6. Cost in terms of hop counts for using a gateway node for locating a content
source: cgw
4.3.1.2 Output metrics:
The key metrics in a P2P network are based on the number of lost queries as compared
to the number of successful queries. The output parameters that are of interest in the evalu-
ation of SACS are as follows:
1. Number of successful queries Stot
2. Total cost of execution Ctot
3. Total number of queries Ntot
However, here the total number of queries will be constant and instead the cost of exe-
cution as well as the number of successful queries will be evaluated in depth.
- 123 -
4.3.2 Details of experimentation
The simulation execution is based on the execution of four separate Behavior Space ex-
periments. The details of the experiment parameters and the reasoning are given below:
The Behavior space parameters for the experiments are given as follows in Table 12. We
can note that some parameters are the same across all simulations while two key parame-
ters are varied i.e. max-ttl and the sacs-radius parameters. Each of these variables in the
simulations starts with a certain value. Subsequently these variables are incremented by the
next value listed up until it reaches the third listed value as shown in the table. In addition,
the last two experiments are conducted to evaluate the mobility of computing node devices.
Table 12 Simulation parameters
Params Exp I Exp II Exp III Exp IV
gw-cost 10 10 10 10
n-srchs 100 100 100 100
sens-radius 2 2 2 2
n-gw 10 10 10 10
n-cs 10 10 10 10
max-ttl 10 [5 5 20] 10 [5 5 20]
sacs-radius [0 5 20] [0 5 20] [0 5 20] [0 5 20]
k 5 5 5 5
Static Static Mobility Mobility
The descriptive statistics of the first experiment are given in Table 13. We can note here
that the total simulations were 250 with each simulation repeated 50 times. The successful
queries, total queries and the hop counts are also given.
- 124 -
Table 13 SACS varying with constant TTL
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
runnum 250 1 250 125.50 72.313
max-ttl 250 10 10 10.00 .000
sacs-radius 250 0 20 10.00 7.085
nsucc 250 16 399 219.51 108.612
ntot 250 500 500 500.00 .000
nhop 250 3194 5055 3970.77 559.595
Valid N (listwise) 250
For the next experiment, the descriptive statistics are given in Table 14. Here the total
set of simulation runs was 1000. The max-ttl as well as the sacs radius were both varied
periodically in the course of the experiments.
Table 14 SACS and TTL varying
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Runnum 1000 1 1000 500.50 288.819
max-ttl 1000 5 20 12.50 5.593
sacs-radius 1000 0 20 10.00 7.075
Nsucc 1000 7 455 217.40 119.092
Ntot 1000 500 500 500.00 .000
Nhop 1000 2125 9885 4541.87 1902.447
Valid N (listwise) 1000
The next two experiments were concerned with mobility of computing devices. The de-
scriptive statistics are given in Table 15. The total simulations in this case were 250. The
max-ttl was made constant and only the sacs-radius was varied.
- 125 -
Table 15 SACS vary with constant TTL (mobility)
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
runnum 250 1 250 125.50 72.313
max-ttl 250 10 10 10.00 .000
sacs-radius 250 0 20 10.00 7.085
nsucc 250 8 349 194.64 88.675
Ntot 250 500 500 500.00 .000
Nhop 250 3369 5076 4113.39 479.169
Valid N (listwise) 250
The final set of experiments was conducted again to test mobility. This was similar to
experiment 2 since it was based on varying both the max-ttl value as well as the sacs-radius
values periodically. The descriptive statistics here are given in Table 16.
Table 16 Experiment with TTL and SACS varying (mobility)
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
runnum 1000 1 1000 500.50 288.819
max-ttl 1000 5 20 12.50 5.593
sacs-radius 1000 0 20 10.00 7.075
nsucc 1000 6 430 208.20 111.068
Ntot 1000 500 500 500.00 .000
Nhop 1000 1956 9883 4690.41 1916.672
Valid N (listwise) 1000
4.3.2.1 Discussion of results
The first set of results is the details of variation of sacs-radius and its effects on the suc-
cessful queries. Here we can note in Figure 39 that there are five values for the sacs-radius
ranging from 0 to 20. Here the value 0 implies that the SACS is not used whereas on the y-
axis, the number of successful queries are being listed. As can be noted here from the earli-
er descriptive statistics, each point represents a set of 50 repeated experiments and as such
gives a pretty good realistic example of the outcome and cannot be considered as a mere
chance. We note here that very few successful queries exist in the case of not using sacs
- 126 -
(SACS=0). However, as we make a SACS radius value of 5, the number of successful que-
ries almost increases 5 times. The increase however is not uniform with a further increase
in SACS radius. Thus, the biggest jump in successful queries is for a small SACS radius.
This is quite an interesting result because it implies that with a minimal use of SACS, there
is a significant improvement in the success rate for searchers.
Figure 39: 95% Confidence interval error plot for successful queries plotted against the increasing
sacs-radius
The next figure is based on the effects of increase of the SACS-radius on the overall
cost of execution of the queries in terms of hop counts as shown in Figure 40. The results
here are very similar to the successful queries in the previous figure. We notice that the
cost is very large in the case of not using SACS close to 5000 hops. By merely turning on
the SACS by giving sacs-radius of 5, the cost significantly decreases down to almost 3950
- 127 -
hops. There is a further decrease in cost when sacs-radius is made 10. However the jump is
not that significant. This is even further noticeable when the sacs-radius is further in-
creased. Thus it corroborates with the small-world phenomenon that just by using a small
sacs-radius of 5, queries can easily locate the content sources.
Figure 40: 95% Confidence interval plot for hop count (cost) vs an increase of the SACS-radius
In the previous figures, we note the first exploratory hypothesis about the effects of
changing the sacs-radius on both the overall cost as well as the number of successful que-
ries. The goal of the next plot as shown in Figure 41 is to test another hypothesis. This
hypothesis was based on the TTL value of the queries. So, the big question to look for here
was what if it was the TTL value of the queries that was actually resulting in the success of
- 128 -
SACS. Also one more point to examine is how this effect would be coupled with the
change in the sacs-radius. So, we can observer this effect using a scatter plot. In a scatter
plot, different values of the simulation run can be noted. Here, the y-axis is labeled in terms
of cost or hop count whereas the x-axis is giving details in terms of the TTL values of the
queries. On the other hand, the data is color coded based on the sacs radius. Here, we can
clearly see that the cost of queries without the use of SACS is always large. The difference
for smaller TTL values is not as pronounced as larger TTL values. As a matter of fact, the
higher the TTL values, the more pronounced is the effect of a better cost for all sacs-radius
values. And from max-ttl value of 10 onwards, the difference in all experiments is very
clear in terms of significant reduction of hop counts/cost.
- 129 -
Figure 41: Scatter graph showing the variation of the cost in terms of hop count with a change in max-
ttl and sacs-radius
For verification of this hypothesis in terms of successful queries, we plot the next graph
in Figure 42 using mean successful queries on the y-axis color coded according to different
sacs-radius values. The x-axis depicts the max-ttl values. Now, we can note here that for
max-ttl = 5, sacs-15 appears to have the best possible successful query values. However,
the numbers of successful queries for k-random walk without SACS remains constantly
and significantly lower than any of the SACS radius simulation experiments. Furthermore,
we note that sacs-radius = 5 reflects the most benefit as it is compared with the implemen-
tation model not executing SACS. However, the differences between all sacs values are
initially very small for max-ttl of 5. Subsequently however, for an increase in sacs-radius
values, there is a corresponding increase in the successful queries. This effect is however,
- 131 -
not as pronounced as the difference between non-SACS and sacs-radius = 5 successful
queries.
Figure 42: Mean successful queries with a variation in max-ttl value and a variation in colors based on
different sacs-radius values
Up until this point, several different hypotheses have been tested and it has been discov-
ered that SACS indeed can be a better alterative as compared to k-random walk algorithm
from the domain of unstructured P2P networks. However, it is important to note here that
till now, the scenarios are for static nodes. While this is good in theoretical terms, this is
not a reflection of a realistic physical environment. In a realistic physical environment, de-
vices are not stationary. Rather, they tend to move in a Brownian random motion as noted
by Groenevelt et al. in [175]. Gonzalez et al. [176] note similar patterns in human mobility
- 130 -
models. As such, the next set of experiments is concerned with mobility modeling of the
computing device agents. The idea here is to evaluate the results of using SACS algorithm
in the case of mobility modeled as Brownian random motion.
Figure 43: 95% confidence interval plot showing the effects of increasing sacs-radius on the number of
successful queries in the case of node mobility
The first plot using mobility is for the evaluation of the effects of changing the sacs-
radius by means of measuring the number of successful queries. Here, in Figure 43, we
note that with different sacs-radius values, the results are still much better than the k-
random walk reference algorithm. However, we also note an interesting observation that
the value of successful queries increases from sacs-radius of 5 to sacs-radius of 10 but ta-
pers off at sacs-radius of 15. And furthermore sacs-radius of 20 actually starts to reduce the
number of successful queries. In other words, with the mobility problem, because of per-
- 132 -
haps the motion of the intermediate nodes over time, some of the queries tend to get lost if
there is a very large sacs-radius.
Figure 44: 95% confidence interval plot for the cost in terms of hop count with a variation of the sacs-
radius value in mobility of computing devices scenario
While we have noted the effects of the successful queries, next we want to evaluate the
effects of sacs-radius on the total cost of the search in terms of hop counts. Here, we can
again note the significant jump in cost from no SACS algorithm to sacs-radius = 5. Now,
interestingly unlike the previous plot, after sacs-radius is varied to 10, the value of cost ta-
pers off a bit and actually increases from sacs-radius of 10 to sacs-radius of 15 and
eventually sacs-radius of 20. Thus, we note here the negative effects of the mobility on the
SACS algorithm resulting in a deterioration of results as nodes move about randomly.
- 133 -
Figure 45: Scatter plot of hop count cost with a variation in max-ttl value color coded according to
sacs-radius in mobility modeling
In the next set of plots, we want to note the bigger picture so we use scatter plot and
note the cost as it varies with a change in the max-ttl value and the sacs-radius as shown in
Figure 45. In this case, we note again that the cost associated with the algorithm in case of
mobility is always better than the cases of not using SACS. However, the cost difference
shows that increasing a max-ttl value does not have much impact in terms of differences
between different sacs-radius values. One important point to note here is that initially for
sacs-radius = 5, we note the lowest cost but as max-ttl increases, the cost of sacs-radius = 5
tends to become the highest and the lowest cost being that of sacs-radius = 15 at max-ttl
value=20.
- 134 -
Figure 46: Average values of successful queries with respect to a variation in max-ttl value color coded
according to sacs-radius in the case of using mobility modeling
In the next plot, we test this hypothesis in the case of successful queries. Here for vali-
dation, instead of using a scatter plot, we use a mean value plot. In this case, we note again
the significant difference between non-SACS algorithm and different SACS runs. Now, in
terms of successful queries, initially, sacs-radius of 10 has the largest number of successful
queries. However sacs-radius of 15 wins when max-ttl value increases to 10 and keeps
winning till the value of 20. As such, we can note here that mobility models have interest-
ing effects on the SACS algorithm but SACS performs quite strongly even in this case.
- 135 -
4.3.3 Discussion of Intelligence in cas Agents
While certain types of heuristics and decision support are added inside “intelligent or ra-
tional” agents, the goal of a cas simulation is different. Intelligent engineered autonomous
agents can use game theory to make choices, execute evolutionary algorithms to find best
chromosomes with the highest fitness values and execute Monte Carlo simulations to find
the best possible outcomes based on knowledge of input distributions. The idea of cas
simulation is based on using simple but numerous agents in a system similar to life.
As discussed earlier in previous chapters, in living systems, individual cells behave in
very simple ways. The total interaction of most cells involves simple operations such as
sensing chemicals, emitting chemical molecules, using chemical molecules and cellular
motion. However, based on these few simple rules and interactions, large and complex
multi-cellular organisms are formed. In terms of learning and adaptation, unlike a typical
MAS, where a single agent learns from either supervised, unsupervised or reinforcement
learning schemes, agents in agent-based models have very simple models of internal adap-
tation. However, the real adaptation is collective. As such, while cells in the body have
very simple states, the global cas in the form of e.g. the body of a mammal adapts collec-
tively to different events in the environment. An example is that of blood clotting. While
each particular cell always performs the same actions that it was designed for, the body as
a whole adapts if there is say a wound or a bruise. Different cells are created or guided by
chemicals to a particular spot by the body and result in clot formation. A detailed descrip-
tion of the differences between these two types of agents was given earlier in Chapter 3 in
the Scientometric Analysis of Agent-based computing domain. In this chapter, we propose
the concept of exploratory agent-based modeling level of the proposed unified framework
for the modeling and simulation of cas.
- 136 -
4.4 Conclusions
In this chapter, we have given details of how a completely new cas domain applica-
tion can be modeled using exploratory agent-based modeling. We have used an application
which, to the best of our knowledge, cannot otherwise be modeled using any other simula-
tor easily because this particular application is from the “Internet of Things” domain.
Modeling Internet of things requires a flexible modeling paradigm since it uses concepts
from the domain of P2P networks, ambient intelligence, pervasive computing and wireless
sensor networks.
Our exploratory agent-based modeling of the SACS algorithm demonstrates clearly how
different cas researchers can use agent-based modeling to perform extensive simulation
experiments using parameter sweeping to come up with comprehensive hypotheses. Our
results demonstrated the effective testing and validation of various exploratory hypotheses.
We demonstrated how one hypothesis can lead to the next and how simulation experiments
can be designed to test these hypotheses. In the next chapter, our goal will be to further ex-
ploit agent-based modeling by demonstrating how ABMs can be described by means of a
pseudocode based specification coupled with a complex network model and Centrality
“footprint” to allow for a comparison of ABMs across scientific disciplines.
- 137 -
5 Proposed Framework: Descriptive Agent-based
Modeling Level
In the previous chapter we have demonstrated how agent-based modeling can be used to
develop exploratory models of cas. The key idea in exploratory modeling was to use agent-
based models to supplement research studies with simulation models with the goal of eval-
uating feasibility of further research.
An examination of the interchange of messages between researchers associated with
the mailing lists of agent-based modelers can be considered to offer a cross-sectional view
of the cognitive modeling problems faced by various cas researchers. It is pertinent to note
here that the number of NetLogo-users mailing list[177] subscribers amount close to 3, 800
subscribers and the list contains almost 13, 000 archived messages to date. Here, we can
develop a closer examination of the cognitive problems faced by researchers since it
demonstrates that while helpful, exploratory modeling approach intrinsically lacks key fea-
tures which are of importance to cas researchers. Some of these missing features result in
problems as can be noted as follows:
A. Firstly, exploratory agent-based models tend to have a narrow focus. While multi-
disciplinary cas researchers are interested in exploiting modeling constructs from
one scientific research domain for use in another, there is no easy way to transfer
knowledge related to model concepts in this manner. With models developed pri-
marily for a single specific scientific application, researchers find it difficult to
transfer knowledge from one exploratory ABM to another cas application domain
even though apparently there are inherent similarities between the models. To the
best of our knowledge, the only two means of transferring constructs is to either re-
- 138 -
use source code snippets or else replicate models based on textual descriptions
(Both approaches shall be discussed critically later in this chapter). So, a model built
for say, tumor growth might have useful constructs which could be used in a com-
pletely different scientific domain such as data aggregation in Wireless Sensor
Networks. However, even with this intuitive similarity, there is no easy translation
of model constructs from one domain to the other using a non-code but high fidelity
description of the model allowing for an almost 1-1 correspondence of model con-
structs between the specification and the ABM.
B. Another set of modeling problems can be observed in the case of model comparison
of different case studies and application domains. Again, to the best of our
knowledge, there is currently no mechanism for model comparison across cas do-
mains and applications. As an example, Social Scientists have well-developed
agent-based models and concepts for gossiping [20]. Intuitively, this could perhaps
be very similar to how a forest fire spreads in a forest. In other words, the way fire
moves from a single tree or a group of trees to its vicinity appears similar to gossip
propagation models in communities and cultures. So, it is inherently interesting to
be able to compare these models. However, once again, there is no well-known
standard or formal means of comparison of these abstract concepts gleaned from
Agent-based Models across domains. Currently, typical descriptions available for
models are textual in nature. Textual descriptions offer a limited ability to perform
comparisons. If such comparisons are performed, they are qualitative in nature and
not quantitative. As such, having the ability to compare different agent-based mod-
els quantitatively could offer deeper and objective insights into different types of
agent-based models without either requiring the model to be implemented or else
executed for collecting simulation data.
- 139 -
C. A third setback of exploratory ABMs is the difficulties in teaching model constructs.
While there is notable community interest in this domain as can be observed by the
close to 800 educators enrolled in the NetLogo-Educators mailing list[178], the only
current well-known option of teaching ABMs is via code tutorials. However, these
tutorials are often incomplete, relate to a specific application domain only or else
require learning a specific set of Language Libraries to develop simple ABMs.
As a means of exploring these problems further, we evaluated random snapshots of top-
ics and message data in a typical fortnight of “netlogo-users” mailing list. Results of the
experimentation shown in Table 17, demonstrate that almost 77% of topics and 85% of
messages are on “how to model”.
On a further semantic examination of the message contents, a key problem can be clear-
ly identified that most cas researchers have difficulty extracting ideas from computer
programs or code snippets. This problem includes the difficulty in both describing models
as well as in relating “implicit mental models” to program code. Thus, while a large num-
ber of open source models are freely available online, a large number of mailing list users
still tend to ask fundamental modeling questions; questions which apparently demonstrate
the difficulty of most users in understanding ABMs using only code.
Table 17 Categorical Sampling of Netlogo-users messages for a recent two weeks period (Aug 2011)
Topic n-Topics % Messages %
Errors 2 6.45 3 3.49
How to model? 24 77.42 73 84.88
Extending/Connecting tools 5 16.13 10 11.63
Total 31 86
In this chapter, as a first step towards resolving these communication problems, we pro-
pose an extension to exploratory agent-based modeling. Our proposed DescRiptivE Agent-
- 141 -
based Modeling (DREAM) approach has been developed with the following user-centric
design goals:
A. DREAM should extend exploratory Agent-based Modeling by allowing for a quanti-
tative comparison of different models without requiring coding or execution of
simulation experiments.
B. Focus on better and more effective documentation has numerous benefits as noted
by Parnas[179] . It can also assist in reverse engineering and model replication as
noted by Li[180]. Thus, in addition to a textual description, the proposed approach
should allow for examination of an ABM visually similar to that demonstrated earli-
er in Chapter 3. As discussed earlier, visual models allow the model to be examined
and analyzed from an abstract perspective rather than requiring researchers to look
at the source code. Such an approach would thus prove useful in model and cas
comparison, description during teaching and in general, more effective knowledge
transfer and communication between multidisciplinary cas researchers.
C. Thirdly the proposed methodology should allow for a translation from these differ-
ent sub-models such as from a visual (Complex network-based) model to
pseudocode specification model to an agent-based model. Apparently this is possible
only if there is a high level of coherence between elements of the sub-models.
The proposed DREAM approach is based on merging complex network modeling ap-
proach with pseudocode-based specification model to specify Agent-based Models. It also
minimizes learning curve because Complex Networks is an existing area of research inter-
est for cas researchers as noted earlier in Chapter 2. As demonstrated earlier in Chapter 3,
Complex Networks allow for exploring data visually as well as quantitatively. Whereas
coupling a pseudocode based specification model allows for a one-to-one correspondence
of the non-code description with the ABM.
- 140 -
The structure of the rest of the chapter is as follows:
First, a generalized description of the proposed DREAM methodology is given. Next as
a validation of this modeling methodology, an experimental design of a complete case
study example is developed. This is followed by a discussion of results of the case study as
well as a critical review of the proposed methodology with existing methods of document-
ing and teaching Agent-based models such as “code templates” and “textual descriptions”.
Finally we conclude the chapter.
5.1 Research Methodology
An examination of communication of cas researchers over the past several years in
mailing lists related to Agent-based modeling (such as netlogo-users[177], Repast-
interest[181] etc.) coupled with an examination of cas scientific literature as examined in
detail earlier in chapter 3 reveals that typically cas research can start in several different
ways. Some of the possible cases can be listed as follows:
1. Researchers can start with a concrete research question and need to develop a simu-
lation model to explore it further.
2. Researchers can start with a generalized cas domain but without a specific research
question in mind. In this case, they subsequently want to explore the intrinsic dy-
namics of the domain further using a simulation study.
3. Researchers can have interest in relating multidisciplinary cas studies to discover
generalized patterns related to their particular application case study/scientific do-
main. As such, they are looking to relate concepts from other models to their area of
interest either for developing models or else for comparison of these models with
their models.
- 142 -
Based on these set of ideas, next we give an overview of the proposed DREAM meth-
odology.
5.1.1 An overview of DREAM
In this section, we describe the proposed DREAM methodology in detail. Here the goal
is to provide details in the context of how cas research studies are typically conducted and
how DREAM can be applied to any agent-based modeling case study.
Development of descriptive agent-based models for inter-disciplinary
communication, comparison and learning
Figure 47: Descriptive agent-based modeling level
- 143 -
In contrast to exploratory agent-based modeling level, the proposed descriptive agent-
based modeling level of the framework entails developing a Descriptive Agent-based
Model (DREAM), which comprises of a complex network model, a quantitative centrality-
based “footprint” based on the complex network model coupled with a pseudocode-based
specification model. The goal of this framework level is to allow for inter-disciplinary
comparative studies and a free exchange of information and ideas without regards to scien-
tific disciplinary boundaries. So, if a model has been developed in say, Biological
Sciences, the model should be comparable to models developed in Social Sciences both
visually as well as quantitatively. We can observe further details of this framework level in
Figure 47.
To start with, as a means of generalization, we start by presenting a definition of
DREAMS specification framework. The presentation of this definition is inspired by the
Discrete Event System Specification (DEVS) formalism proposed by Concepcion and Zei-
gler[182].
A DREAM D is a structure
Where
N is a Complex Network model
S is a specification model
A is an Agent-based model
D = N , S, A
Where A can be further expanded as following
A = G, AG, PT , LN , P, E
Where
G represents the global variables including both the input as well as the output vari-
ables
- 144 -
ABM
Experiments
Procedures
Reporter-
Argumented Argumented
Forever Reporter
Patches
Attributes
Agents
Breeds
Attributes
Attributes
Globals
Output
Input
AG represents the agents
PT represents the patches
LN represents the links
P represents the procedures
E represents the simulation experiments
One way of understanding how DREAM can be used is by an examination of how an
ABM is structured in NetLogo as shown in Figure 48. Thus N, the complex network sub-
model can be translated into a specification model S by handling each of these sections as
shown in the figure. Furthermore, the specification model S can be translated to the ABM
A and vice versa informally.
Links
Attributes
Breeds
Attributes
Figure 48: An overview of ABM constructs in relation with the specification model constructs
Here, we can note from the diagram that a complete ABM encompasses various
- 145 -
constructs. The first of these is the “globals” construct. As discussed earlier in the descrip-
tion of the baseline network model, this construct corresponds directly to the one in the
network structure. Thus, globals can be of two types i.e. the input globals which constitute
the model configuration parameters allowing the user to vary the behavior of the model
either manually or else programmatically and the output globals which typically represent
metrics associated with the simulation results. So, while input globals modify the behavior,
output globals represent the quantitative output metrics.
Other than the globals, the specification model can have particular attributes for the
general breed of agent (turtle in the case of NetLogo). If however, there is need to use spe-
cific types of agents, breeds can be defined which can be designed with further attributes.
Similar to agents, we have links which can themselves have attributes as well as be
classified using new breeds. If new link breeds are defined, occasionally, they themselves
are assigned new attributes. Patches, on the other hand, are general purpose constructs and
while they can also be assigned attributes, it is not possible to sub-class them into making
breeds.
While different Agent-based Modeling tools have different ways of specifying proce-
dures (such as using methods associated with a class in the case of using an Object-
Oriented programming paradigm such as Java), here we give a generic definition without
requiring procedures to be tied with agents (similar to use of procedures in Logo-based
tools). If procedures are of general purpose or utility type, they can come directly under the
umbrella of “procedures”. However, if the procedures represent specifically one simulation
cycle (in other words, they need to be called repeatedly), then they would come under the
classification of “forever” procedures. In addition, if they return one or more values, then
they are classified as “reporter” procedures. If they take in arguments, they are classified
under “argumented” procedures. Finally, procedures which both take in values as argu-
- 146 -
ments and also return some values are classified as “reporter-argumented” procedures.
Eventually, in a well-structured ABM, the entire set of constructs might be useful for one
or more simulation experiments. Thus, it can be noted here that this division of constructs
has been designed so as to specifically allow the specification model to have a direct one-
to-one correspondence with the ABM constructs as noted earlier in the network model.
The proposed DREAM methodology has been designed to allow transition from the
various sub-models such as the complex network sub-model to the pseudocode-based spec-
ification model and the agent-based model by allowing for a high degree of coherence
between these sub-models. An overview of how translation of various models is possible
can be seen in Figure 49. In this figure, we can note that the modeling research ideas relat-
ed to a cas are translated firstly on the basis of an initial implicit cognitive mental model.
The first step towards developing the DREAM model is to develop a complex network
model. Subsequently for interdisciplinary comparison, the research can proceed by means
of either performing a complex network analysis or else by an informal expansion of the
network model into a pseudocode-based specification. In the case of a complex network
analysis, a result digital quantitative footprint emerges which can prove to be useful for
comparing different models. On the other hand, the network model can subsequently be
informally expanded in the form of a pseudocode-based specification model with the idea
of improving communication between researchers. Another possibility is that researchers
can use an existing agent-based model and subsequently, reverse engineer it into a pseudo-
code-based specification model. Validation to ensure the correct translation of these models
could be performed by means of informal methods such as testing, face validation and
code walkthroughs etc.
- 147 -
Expansion of
network mod-
el into
pseudocode
Translate pseudocode into
code
Figure 49: Pictorial representation of the DREAM Methodology
As noted by Zeigler [183] real-world complex systems need to be modeled using a mul-
tifaceted approach. As such, we can note here that the DREAM methodology can also be
used in several different ways. One way of starting modeling is when a researcher is able to
come up with a tentative implicit mental model of the proposed agent-based simulation
model, this mental model can be converted to a network sub-model using a proposed base-
line agent-based network model, which can serve as a template for developing agent-based
models6. This baseline network sub-model shown in Figure 50 can be used to develop a
complex network sub-model of new agent-based models by expanding each of the leaves
6 For the purpose of this discussion, we shall be focusing on building agent-based models using the NetLogo
tool.
Implicit
Cognitive
Mental
model
Complex
Network
model Develop a network
model using base-
line network model
Quantitative
Comparison
with other
ABMs
Compare
centrality
and other
network
measures
Use Complex
Network tools
Complex
Network
Analysis
Explain code using
pseudocode models
Agent-based
Model
Pseudocode-
based specifica-
- 148 -
with application case study related constructs. In the next section, we give details about the
development of this complex network model.
Figure 50: Baseline Network template Model of a complete ABM
5.1.2 Design of the Complex Network Model
Initially, to facilitate interactive study, researchers can start by developing a network
sub-model on paper. This baseline network sub-model has been designed to serve as a tem-
plate model. Leaf nodes from this model can first be expanded by connecting them to new
nodes in the domain of the application case study. Therefore, at this stage, researchers can
mind map[184] the network sub-model to describe the agent-based model at an abstract
level.
- 149 -
The ABM is at the center of the network and it is connected to various nodes. If we first
start with the global variables, we note that they are of two specific types. One of these is
for giving inputs to the model, typically using User Interface (UI) elements (such as slider,
switches etc.) while the other are the output global variables, which are expected to help in
retrieving the simulation metrics from the model. These variables cannot be generalized
and would vary on a case-to-case basis. So, cas researchers can add new input and output
global variables by extending the network from these two types of global variables. Using
the network approach, this step can be performed without worrying about actually going
into the details of how the model is going to be practically implemented.
After deciding the global variables, the next step could be to start looking at adding var-
ious agent types or attributes, as needed. Now, there are two possibilities of using agents;
either the generic agent breed (i.e. Turtle) can be used or else one or more new breeds can
be created. If the generic breed is used then it might still be assigned suitable attributes. In
that case, child nodes can be added to the “agent-attributes” node. If however, new agent-
breeds are to be created, they would be attached to the “agent-breeds” node. Subsequently
any attributes that the particular breed is assigned may be next attached to these agent
breeds.
After deciding the breeds, a possible next step can be to decide upon using links and
patches. Patches cannot have further breeds however new breeds for links can be defined.
Not every agent-based model will have use for specific features related to patches or links
so it would depend on the specific model requirements. Similar to the agent breeds, link
breeds can also be defined, if needed. If no new link breed is defined, then the standard
links can be given new attributes as suited to the case study.
After these object types have been defined for the model, the designer can next focus on
the procedures. If the new procedures are general purpose or helper/utility procedures,
- 151 -
nodes with their names can be attached to the “procedures” node directly. If not, then in the
case of “forever” procedures, which represent one simulation execution cycle, procedure
nodes can be connected to the “forever” node. Other options for parent nodes include the
“reporter” procedure node for procedures which return values and “argumented” procedure
node, for procedures which expect arguments for completing their processing. Finally pro-
cedures can also be defined such that they can both take in arguments as well as report
values. Such procedures can be added as children to the “reporter-argumented” parent
node. These names of different nodes are however given primarily as a template and not
meant to be strict in the sense that if in a particular case study, some specific type of proce-
dures are not required, then the related parent node can be removed from the network sub-
model. In other cases, new types of nodes may be added if it allows for a better representa-
tion of the concepts related to the model.
After deciding upon the names and types of the procedures, the last part of the network
that needs to be finalized is the different experiments that are to be executed once the simu-
lation has been completed. Each of these is developed as a single child node attached to the
“BS-Expts” parent node.
5.1.3 Analysis of the network sub-model
After the network has been designed on paper, it can be modeled on the computer. To
start with, a suitably formatted text file (e.g. using a comma separated or tab-separated
format) can be generated with columns depicting the nodes. An example table representing
the baseline model is given in Table 18.
- 150 -
Table 18 Table showing the format for creation of complex network using Cytoscape
Node from Node to
ABM BS-Expts
ABM Globals
Globals InputGlobals
Globals OutputGlobals
Procedures Reporter-Argumented
ABM Agents
Agents Agent-Breeds
Agents Agent-Attributes
ABM Procedures
Procedures Forever
Procedures Reporter
Procedures Argumented
ABM Patches
Patches Patch-Attributes
ABM Links
Links Link-Breeds
Links Link-Attributes
There are several ways in which networks can be extracted from a text file and im-
ported into Network tools such as the Network Workbench[162]. One possible method is to
manually create a plain text file compatible with one of the standard file formats. Subse-
quently, the file can be imported in a complex network modeling tool and visualized using
a suitable layout algorithm such as the GEM Layout in GUESS[167].
In addition to model conversion, the network sub-model can now be analyzed using
CNA as discussed in detail earlier in Chapter 2 and demonstrated in Chapter 3. Such an
analysis would thus allow for several benefits such as:
1. The different centrality measures would serve as a “digital footprint” of the
Agent-based Model.
2. The ability to discover relationships between ABM-based complex network
sub-models across domains or applications quantitatively.
After having developed and analyzed the network sub-model, specification tem-
plates can be used for developing the pseudocode-based descriptive specifications for the
- 152 -
ABM by expanding relevant nodes from the ABM complex network sub-model. These
templates are described in the next sections.
5.1.4 Goals of a pseudocode-based specification model
After the construction of the network sub-model, it can be next expanded into a pseudo-
code-based specification model. For developing this specification, the design goals of this
part of the DREAM methodology can be listed as follows:
1. Robin et al.[185] review facts about “learning curve theory” in the domain of pro-
gramming. They note the general acceptance of the fact that “novice/amateur”
programmers can take up to 10 years of programming practice and experience to
turn into “expert” programmers. As such, the proposed specification syntax should
have a short learning curve by being easy to use for multidisciplinary cas research-
ers to minimize transition difficulties without adding further to this learning curve.
2. It should be based on using a flexible set of terms in either natural language or very
basic formal mathematical terms (such as use of sets or predicates).
3. It should conform to the constructs used in an agent-based model. In other words,
the specification needs to have a strong coherence with the source code for the
agent-based model.
In other words, the key design constraint in the template syntax design is to make it
comfortable for learning and use by multidisciplinary researchers such as social scientists,
life scientists or linguists to use comfortably. The pseudocode part of this syntax can thus
be a comfortable mix and match of any syntax or form which is comprehensible and pre-
ferred by the specific cas researchers
To summarize, based on the specific user-centric design requirements of DREAM
specifications, the guidelines for writing the pseudocode are relaxed and not based on any
- 153 -
type of stringent rules as the entire goal of this modeling approach is to improve communi-
cation without causing hurdles or requiring an extensive learning curve for
multidisciplinary researchers. Pseudocode used can be either “pidgin” code, a technical
term for pseudocode using formal mathematical symbols or else plain English language
pseudocode. The original idea of pidgin code is from pidgin ALGOL (short for ALGO-
rithmic Language)[186].
5.1.5 Templates for the specification model
Here in this section, generalized translation templates are presented. These templates al-
low the expansion of the complex network model to agent-based model and vice versa.
The first template is for defining a new breed. As noted below, it starts with a name and
description of the breed. Type can be either an “agent” or a “link”. Finally, the breed can be
given any number of “own” or “internal variables”. Writing this detailed description thus
allows the researcher to expand and refine the ideas in their implicit mental models by
writing down the specification models.
Breed BreedName: Single Sentence description of breed
Type: Agent | Link
Internal Variables: <variable 1, variable 2, . . , variable n.>
variable1: Conceptual role and description of the variable 1
variable2: Conceptual role and description of the variable 2
. . .
variablen: Conceptual role and description of the variable n
After defining the breeds, a possible next step could be to define the different types of
input and output global variables which will be used in the simulation. By starting with
these variables, the designer can think about the research questions, in general or the prob-
lems to be explored, in particular. Input variables can be described in terms of the user
interface elements whereas output variables can be defined without any relation to these
elements.
- 154 -
Input | Output Globals: <variable 1, variable 2, . . , variable n.>
Sliders:
variable1: Description of the variable
variable2: Description of the variable
. . .
variablen: Description of the variable n
Switch:
sw1?: Description of the switch
sw2?: Description of the switch
. . .
swn?: Description of the switch
Input:
ip1?: Description of the input
ip2?: Description of the input
. . .
ipn?: Description of the input
Output:
op1?: Description of the output metric
op2?: Description of the output metric
. . .
opn?: Description of the output metric
Next, we present the template for different types of procedures. Procedures can be of
numerous types as discussed earlier. By using this particular template, the researchers can
give details of the procedures they intend to use in the model. The template firstly de-
scribes the input (pre-conditions or the arguments taken in by the procedure). Output is the
resultant or expected outcome of the procedure. Execution can be used to note how the
procedure is called and during what phase of the simulation. Next, the context of the pro-
cedure is defined; contexts can be agent, patch or observer types. Observer context is
useful for general purpose execution or if multiple sub-contexts are going to be used in the
procedure. Finally, the procedure is defined in terms of pseudocode.
- 155 -
Procedure proc1: Description of procedure
Input: Description of inputs and pre-conditions expected by the procedure
Output: Resulting outcome in the simulation
Execution: Called by which procedure and during which process
Context: Observer | Agent | Patch
begin
1. Appropriately indented Pseudocode step
2. Appropriately indented Pseudocode step
3. Appropriately indented Pseudocode step
4. . . . .
5. Appropriately indented Pseudocode step
End
Next, the specification template for experiments is presented.
Experiment exp1: Description and goal of the experiment Inputs: < ip1 , ip2 , . . .ipn >
Setup procedures: < spr1 , spr2 , . . .sprn>
Go procedures: < gpr1 , gpr2 , . . .gprn>
Inputs:
ip1: {constant value} | {[value1 , value2 , . . . valuen } | {[value1→ increment→Finalvalue]}
ip2: {constant value} | {[value1 , value2 , . . . valuen } | {[value1→ increment→Finalvalue]}
. . .
ipn: {constant value} | {[value1 , value2 , . . . valuen } | {[value1→ increment→Finalvalue]}
Stop condition: Pseudocode
Final commands: Pseudocode
In this template, we note that experiments are first described in the top of the schema.
Next, their “setup” and “go” procedures can be defined. “Setup” procedures are those pro-
cedures which will only be called at the start of a simulation experiment. “Go” procedures,
on the other hand, will be executed with each simulation step. Stop condition represents
when a particular simulation run will stop execution. Final commands are the commands
which might be executed once the simulation is terminating. Input values can be specified
either as a single value, or else a group of values or in terms of a three value list (with start,
increment and final value as its members).
- 156 -
5.2 Case study: Overview, Experimental design and Implementation
In the previous section, we have given details of the DREAM methodology by provid-
ing details of how a proposed case study in agent-based modeling may proceed. As a
validation of the proposed methodology, in this section, we give an overview of the case
study, experimental design and the implementation. This includes the development of the
DREAM model consisting of a complex network model, pseudocode-based specification
model, a quantitative centrality-based “footprint”, description of the implementation as
well as the design of the simulation experiments.
5.2.1 Overview
The case study follows the complex adaptive communication networks concept in-
troduced in the previous chapter. In this case study, the goal is to explore a well-known
artificial cas concept of “flocking” and use it to evaluate how Wireless Sensor Network
nodes behave in the vicinity of complex behavior.
It is essentially based on the “Boids” model of flocking behavior introduced earlier
in chapter 2. Boids is an example of an artificial cas. In other words, it is an in-silico repre-
sentation of a set of real-world agents (e.g. birds or fish or insects etc.). The initial idea was
propagated based on an exploration of how flocks of animals and birds group together and
form complex structures based on seemingly simple and local rules. Thus, using rules such
as cognitive perception of nearby “boids”, every Boid agent is able to adjust the direction
such that it neither collides with its neighbor boids nor follows any general direction. The
way this model technically works is based on a set of calculations. In a real living cas, the
calculations are deemed to be performed automatically by means of perception of motion,
however in the artificial life scenario (simulated cas), the calculations have to be actually
performed. This interesting simulation model[187], commonly available with agent-based
- 157 -
simulation tools such as NetLogo exhibits intelligent collective behavior based on local
rules followed by the components (“boids” in this particular case).
5.2.1.1 Problem statement
While the behavior of boids and flocking has been well-studied in literature[100],
to the best of our knowledge, no well-known study has been conducted previously in the
domain of examination of how physical wireless sensor nodes would react in the presence
of a group of flocking “boids”. As discussed earlier, Wireless sensor networks are made up
of sensor nodes and most, if not all, simulators of WSNs are based on extensions of exist-
ing communication network simulators. As such, these simulators have difficulty in
modeling any advanced concept such as “mobility modeling” or else “environment model-
ing”. This is actually a problem because WSNs are not primarily designed for
communication rather network communication is simply a means by which the WSN ex-
tracts sensing information from individual sensor nodes since this environmental sensing is
the primary goal of developing a WSN application[188]. However, it has taken considera-
ble research efforts in the domain of communication networks to come up with custom
algorithms which suit the specialized nature and limited battery problems[189] related to
the WSN nodes[190]. As such, a key focus area of these networks has previously been on
getting the prototypes and the communication of simple messages across the network
working (routing). More recent advanced algorithms include focus on data aggregation and
fusion[191]. However, previously, to the best of our knowledge, the problem of developing
a cas model for WSNs has not been studied. WSNs themselves constitute a cas because of
how they need to self-organize for performing common goals such as monitoring and sens-
ing[73]. In addition, if we couple a cas environment of flocking boids, it poses a set of
interesting questions as to how to study the interactions of two cas with each other in the
same simulation model. The goals of this simulation study can thus be noted as follows:
- 158 -
1. Evaluate the use of simple sensors in sensing complex cas behavior.
2. Evaluate the cas effects in these sensors and note the effects on sensing this
complex behavior when different sensor nodes start to die (due to battery fail-
ure). In other words, the nodes themselves are eliminated from the simulation.
So, assuming the results of the first set of experiments demonstrates if sensing
can somehow be performed, what would be the effects on sensing as WSN
nodes die down due to a battery failure at different time instances during the
simulation.
There are numerous interesting complexity problems which pose a unique set of modeling
challenges in this case study as it reflects a merger of an artificial cas along with the physi-
cal notion of a set of sensor nodes randomly deployed in the same terrain. Some of these
problems can be noted as follows:
1. Complexity due to the special nature of the environment (constituted by the boids as
well as the other sensors)
2. Complexity due to a random deployment model[192].
3. Complexity due to the gradual possibility of reduction in the total number of sensors
available to sense the proximity of the boids.
5.2.2 Agent design
In this section, we describe the design of the agents used in the simulation model.
Primarily there are two types of agents which will be used in the simulation which are de-
scribed next.
- 159 -
5.2.2.1 Boid agents
Boid agents or Boids are the mobile agents in the model. These agents exhibit complex
behaviors. The complex behaviors are collective however as in different real-world cas,
similar to the discussion in the previous chapter, these agents are able to have particular
attributes and behaviors described as follows:
1. Visibility and ability to view
Boids are able to view other Boid agents and can focus on using a certain set of in-
dividuals as their visible neighbors. In other words, this particular group of
individual boids inadvertently decides the direction chosen by the Boid agent in the
near future.
2. Mobility
Boids are able to move about the screen. This motion is in general dictated by the
neighbors. In other words, each Boid agent decides upon a certain direction to fol-
low based on its neighbors in a certain “visibility” radius.
3. Change of direction
The direction followed by each Boid is what results in the flocking behavior. Thus
this change of direction is based on certain calculations which we shall describe
next.
Boid agents change their directions based on the following three functions:
5.2.2.1.1 Separate function
This function is primarily for ensuring collision avoidance. The way it works is that each
agent first locates its nearest Boid neighbor. Next, it perceives the agent’s heading and
slightly changes its own direction.
- 161 -
5.2.2.1.2 Align function
This function has a different goal. It allows the agent to change its direction towards a
certain heading. This heading is calculated by first enlisting other neighbor Boid agents,
which this agent considers as its flockmate neighbors. Next, their headings are calculated
and averaged. Based on this heading, the agent slightly turns towards this heading. The net
effect is to align in the general direction of the nearby agents.
5.2.2.1.3 Cohere function
This function is called alongside the align function. While the previous function discov-
ered the average flockmate heading, this particular function is concerned with the angles of
the other flockmate agents towards this agent. Thus, first the function requires the discov-
ery of the angles of these agents to itself but adds 180 degrees to these angles. The reason
for that is because that way, it will give the direction from this agent’s perspective instead
of the other agents’ perspectives. Then these angles are averaged. Finally the agent adjusts
its own heading towards this general direction slightly.
5.2.2.2 Node agents
In the same ABM as the boids model, the case study requires the placement of the sen-
sor node agents. These agents are randomly deployed. Such kind of deployment follows
the concept of “smart dust” devices[193] which can be deployed either in space[194] or on
land. In the case study, these agents have communication capabilities. Thus, these node
agents can communicate with a base station which is located within their transmission ra-
dius (single-hop). As such, they do not require multi-hop communication paradigms. The
reason for choosing a single-hop network sub-model is to allow focus on the sensing aspect
because if multi-hop networking was used, a considerable energy can be lost in developing
the routing algorithms. However, in this scenario, the goal of these sensors is to detect
- 160 -
Active
Boids
Detected
Inactive
(battery
down)
Boids not
Detected
“boids”. The physical implication of detection can possibly involve the use of “infra-red”
or “image-processing” as a means of proximity detection of moving boids. In addition, bi-
nary sensors with acoustic detectors have previously been discussed by Kim et al. [195].
5.2.2.2.1 States of Node agents
Node agents have several different states as shown in Figure 51. Firstly, the agents are
active (in other words functional). If they are functional, next they can go into sensing state
if they detect a Boid in their proximity or else non-sensing state otherwise. However, if
battery power goes down, these agents would then go to inactive state.
Figure 51: State chart diagram for sensor node agents
5.2.3 Network Model
As noted earlier in the chapter, DREAM can be initiated here by developing a paper
model of network design by extending the baseline network model. The network sub-
- 162 -
model can be imported into a network modeling tool. The result can be seen as shown in
Figure 52.
Figure 52: Initial view of imported network
In its current state, the network is difficult to comprehend. As such, there is need for
network manipulation. After the network has been further manipulated using various layout
algorithms, the resulting network can be viewed in Figure 53.
This network model will be described in detail and a CNA will be performed next. The
results will be discussed in the results section of the chapter.
- 163 -
Figure 53: Network view after manipulation algorithms
5.2.4 Pseudocode-based specification
Next we develop a detailed translated specification model expanded from this network
sub-model as a means of describing the model in detail. We first start by describing the
agents and breeds.
5.2.4.1 Agents and Breeds
The model has two breeds and their definitions are given next in the form of a specifica-
tion model as below:
Breed Node: This breed represents the Wireless Sensor Nodes
Internal Variables: <boids-near, sensed?>
boids-near: All agents of breed boid which come closer to the given sensor node
sensed?: A Boolean variable which represents the state of the sensor in response to sensing
Now, the “Node” breed here is first described in the specification model. Afterwards we
note the internal variables that will be used in the simulation. There are two specific inter-
- 164 -
nal variables here. One is the “boids-near” variable. This variable is used to keep an
“agentset” of all nearby boids. The variable is key to the discovery of flocking which is one
of the basic simulation requirements for the design of the sensor nodes.
On the other hand, “sensed?” variable is a Boolean variable. It represents the state of the
sensor. In other words, when the sensor is active and is detecting boids in its vicinity, this
Boolean variable will turn true. However, if the sensor is active and not detecting any boids
in its sensing radius, the value will turn false.
The next breed is the “boid” breed, which is described below in the specification model
as follows:
Breed Boid: This breed represents the Boids (birds)
Internal Variables: <nearest-neighbor, flockmates> nearest-neighbor: A boid agent nearest to the agent itself
flockmates: An internal model agentset of other boids which this boid considers as flockmates
The breed “Boid” represents the Boids agent type in general. Now, this particular agent
breed/type has two internal variables. The first internal variable is the “nearest-neighbor”
variable. Nearest neighbor is a variable which will be holding an agent. This single agent
will be reflecting the “internal model” of the agent regarding which other environmental
agent is physically near to this agent. This modeling concept reflects the cas concepts dis-
cussed earlier in Chapter 2. This internal model of the Boid agent keeps updating over
time. We would like to note here that this concept of internal model matches with the con-
cept of “Belief” in the well-known “Belief-Desire-Intention framework by Rao and
Georgoff[196] used to model rational agents in multiagent systems.
Next internal variable of the Boid agent reflects the flockmates “agentset”. Flockmates
are again related to the belief of the current agent. In other words, the agent has this “inter-
nal model” noting that this set of agents is its flockmates. Now, since every Boid agent
might be moving in the simulation as well as continuously updating this variable, the fact
- 165 -
that one agent has other agents listed as flockmates does not guarantee that the other agents
will also keep this agent as flockmate.
After developing a specification model of the agent breeds, we next develop a model for
the various global variables. These variables are important for the configuration of the
simulation model.
5.2.4.2 Globals
Here we describe the global variables for the simulation model. Now, in this model, the
key input global variables here are four in number. These are described next in the specifi-
cation model given below.
Input Globals: <n, n-boids, visible?, max-scen?>
Sliders: n: Used for giving input for the number of sensors in the simulation
n-boids: Used for giving input for the number of boids
Switch:
visible?: Switch used to remove boids from the screen for only observing patterns in sensors
max-scen?: Switch used to create maximum sensors with one sensor per patch
In this specification, we can note clearly now that two of the variables viz. “n” and “n-
boids” both represent inputs which are provided by the user via a “slider” UI element in the
NetLogo simulation model. Whereas “visible?” and “max-scen?” are switches or in other
words, represent Boolean input variables. “n” is used to configure the number of initial
sensors in the simulation. These sensors will be randomly deployed when the initial simu-
lation screen is setup. Having “n” as a slider variable allows for a gradual change in the
input configuration as needed in different experiments. It also assists in minimizing the ef-
fects of random sensor node deployment in the model. So, while one particular simulation
experiment might result in specific results due to certain placement of sensor nodes, repeat-
ing the simulation several times (e.g. 50 times in this particular case study) will ensure that
the specific deployment does not skew the eventual results.
- 166 -
“n-boids” slider variable is used to enter the number of boids used in the simulation.
The reason for having this variable configurable is to test the validity of hypotheses with a
variation in the number of Boid agents. So, essentially this helps answering questions such
as:
- If a hypothesis appears to be true with a certain number of Boid agents, would the
same be true with lesser agents or else more agents?
The same can be noted about the slider described earlier i.e. depicting the initial number
of sensor nodes in the simulation.
The switch “visible?” is especially useful in case we do not want to observe the simula-
tion based on the boids. In other words, if we only want to examine the patterns being
made in the randomly deployed sensors, then we can use this switch by turning it to false.
The other switch “max-scen?” is for the maximum scenario of sensors in the sense that
in this case, sensor nodes will be located in the form of a lattice over the entire simulation
world. Thus each “patch” of the simulation will behave as a single agent. This could be
useful when instead of a randomly deployed sensor network, we want to use a set of sen-
sors which are placed at exact locations. This would again allow us to examine the validity
of the hypotheses that are to be tested in the simulations.
5.2.4.3 Procedures
After describing the breeds and the global variables, we next start to describe the vari-
ous procedures which will be part of the model. These procedures can be of different types
and we shall use the templates described earlier in the methodology section as a means of
describing and expanding each procedure in detail.
The first procedure is the setup procedure. The specification model for the setup proce-
dure is given below as follows:
- 167 -
Procedure setup: Setting up the simulation
Input: Uses global parameters from the User Interface
Output: All agents and patches are setup for simulation
Execution: Called at the start Context: Observer
begin
1. Clear the screen.
2. Clear all nodes
3. Clear all patches
4. Create WSN nodes
5. Create Boid nodes
End
The “setup” procedure is the key procedure to every agent-based simulation model.
While the actual name of the procedure might be different, similar procedures are needed
to setup the scenarios in a simulation. Here, it can be noted that in this particular “setup”,
it needs to be ensured that the remnants of the previous simulation experiment do not dis-
turb the next simulation. As such, the previous results are also cleared before the execution
of the next simulation. This would allow the simulation experiments to eventually run in an
automated fashion. Next, each of the patches is sent a message. This message is to change
their particular color to “white”. The reason for doing that is to be able to better observe
the simulation visually during the animations. After this, three different functions are called
next. Each of these functions sets up part of the scenario. Dividing the setup into multiple
functions allows for code localization. Thus, if needed, the particular functions/procedures
can be modified without changing the global setup procedure. Next we describe each of
these procedures. The first of these procedures is the “make-wsn” procedure described as
follows:
- 168 -
Procedure make-wsn: Creating the nodes
Input: Uses global parameters from the User Interface
Output: All nodes are created after this function call
Execution: Called by setup procedure Context: Observer
begin
1. If maximum sensors are needed
2. Create maximum node agents
3. Else
4. Create agents based on required numbers
End
“make-wsn” is a procedure which will setup the sensor nodes in the simulation experi-
ments. It is called without any particular context (in other words, labeled as the observer
context). Next, we describe the “init-node” procedure as follows:
Procedure init-node: To Initialize the nodes
Input: Uses internal variables of node
Output: The node is configured according to the norms of the simulation
Execution: Called by make-wsn
Context: Agent
begin
1. Initialize active sensor nodes displaying their state
End
Note here that this procedure has an “agent” context. In other words, this implies that
the procedure can be used by changing specific attributes of the agent. Here the goal is to
initialize a single Node agent for the simulation. This procedure is called by the “make-
wsn” procedure. It essentially sets the color, shape, size and the initially active state of the
sensor before the start of the simulation.
The next procedure is the “make-reg-wsn” procedure:
- 169 -
Procedure make-reg-wsn: For Creating nodes according to inputs
Input: Uses global variables from User Interface
Output: The entire wsn is configured according to the norms inputs
Execution: Called by make-wsn
Context: Observer
begin
1. Create nodes
2. Place nodes at random locations in the simulation world
End
This procedure is used to create the randomly deployed sensor network. It uses global
variables from the User interface elements and is executed by the “make-wsn” procedure.
It creates “n” nodes and then firstly initializes each node by calling “init-node” and second-
ly sets their location randomly in the simulation world. Next, it demonstrates the use of
individual intelligence of the agents by allowing “node” agents to relocate based on the
proximity of other nodes. This will allow the simulation to be more realistic since in the
real physical world, the chance of two sensors at the same location is not very probable. It
is important to note here that while this mobility is part of the procedure, it is not part of
the capability of the sensor nodes in this case study. Simply mobility of nodes is used here
to have a better and more realistic placement for simulation execution.
We next write the specification of the “make-boids” procedure given as follows:
Procedure make-boids: For creating boids according to inputs
Input: Uses global variables from User Interface
Output: Boids are created and initialized
Execution: Called by setup
Context: Observer
begin
1. Create boids
2. Initialize boids
3. Place boids at suitable random locations in the simulation environment
End
The “make-boids” procedure is a basic setup procedure. It is used to create and setup
agent attributes such as the shape, size, color and location of the Boid agents.
- 171 -
We next write the specification of the “go” procedure. The “go” procedure is responsi-
ble for executing a single step in the simulation. As such, it needs to be called repeatedly.
It takes in global parameters from the user interface. Firstly, it is expected to increment a
global environment specific tick count. While simulation runs can execute without incre-
menting the tick count, it generally makes concrete steps in the simulation, which can be
later measured (as we shall want to do in “go80” procedure). Next this procedure calls
“move-boids” and “wsn-sense” procedures. These procedures are responsible for code exe-
cution pertaining to the Boid and the Node agent respectively. Finally plotting code is
executed by calling “do-plot” which will be useful for observing the simulation evolution
temporally as shall be explained subsequently.
Procedure go: For executing one step of the simulation
Input: Uses global parameters from the User Interface
Output: Equates to a single step of each agent in the simulation
Execution: Called repeatedly for execution of the simulation
Context: Observer
begin
1. Move boids in the environment
2. Allow sensors to sense their vicinity for boids
3. Update simulation plots showing active sensing boids
End
Next, we write the specification model of the “move-boids” procedure. As discussed
earlier, this procedure is designed to be the primary procedure for Boid agents. The general
functionality here is similar to standard published “Boids” models and extends NetLogo
model library code. The basic idea in boids simulation is for boids to be close to their per-
ceived flockmates but not too close. So, here the Boid agent looks at its nearest-neighbor
and if it notes that it is too close, it calls “separate” otherwise it calls “align” and “cohere”.
After adjusting the heading using these functions, the agent moves forward by a small
amount.
- 170 -
Procedure move-boids: For moving the boids for a single simulation step
Input: Uses global parameters from the User Interface
Output: Moves each simulated boid by a single simulation step
Execution: Called by the go function
Context: Observer
begin
1. Let boids maintain a list of flockmates
2. Let boids adjust their headings by means of separation, alignment and coherence
End
The first of the direction adjusting procedures that we write the specification for next is
the “separate” procedure and given as follows:
Procedure separate: For moving the boid away from the direction nearest neighbor is moving
Input: Uses no specific input parameters
Output: Moves the boid agent away from the nearest-neighbor boid
Execution: Called by move-boids procedure
Context: Agent
begin
1. Update which of the nearby flockmates are nearby
2. Find the heading of the nearest neighbor
3. Slightly change direction so as to avoid future collision
End
The logic in this procedure is based on messaging. The Boid agent requests its “nearest-
neighbor” for its heading. In a more advanced simulation, the neighbor can decide whether
or not to give the heading back. However, in this case, since the goal here is to examine the
effects of the sensing in sensor nodes, the “Boid” agent gets the heading from the “nearest-
neighbor” and then passes this as an argument to the “turn-away” procedure.
Next, we write the specification of another boid-related procedure “align” as follows:
- 172 -
Procedure align: For moving the boid toward the general direction of flockmates
Input: Uses no specific input parameters
Output: Moves the boid agent towards the average flockmate heading
Execution: Called by move-boids procedure
Context: Agent
begin
1. Update a list of current flockmates
2. Based on the flockmates’ directions, find a suitable average heading
3. Change the direction to this average heading
End
We move next to describe the procedure “cohere” using the templates as follows:
Procedure cohere: For moving the boid for cohering with the flockmates
Input: Uses no specific input parameters
Output: Moves the boid agent towards an average value of heading for cohering
Execution: Called by move-boids procedure
Context: Agent
begin
1. Find the average heading towards flockmates
2. Slightly adjust direction towards this average heading
End
The next procedure “wsn-sense” is related to the sensor Node agents as well as the Boid
agents. Here in “wsn-sense” procedure, the Node agents are used to check their proximity
for Boid agents. If they are discovered then the state of the Node agents is changed both
visually as well as internally.
Procedure wsn-sense: Allows Node agents to change state based on sensing of boids
Input: No specific input values
Output: Changes the state of the sensor nodes based on the proximity of Boid agents to the Node
agent Execution: Forever procedure called from the user interface
Context: Observer
begin
1. Make a list of boids nearby
2. Update state of sensor node based on if there is any boid nearby
End
The final procedure here is the “do-plot” procedure which performs the plotting.
- 173 -
Procedure do-plot: For plotting the current status of Node agents
Input: None
Output: Updates the plot with the current set of Node agents who are sensing Boids nearby
Execution: Called from the go procedure
Context: Observer
begin
1. Plot the number of active sensing sensor nodes
End
5.2.5 Experiments
There are two experiments that we shall be using in this simulation. The first one
demonstrates the effect of the variation of number of sensor Node agents while the second
one shows the effects of the variation in the number of Boid agents.
Experiment vary-sensors: Experiment with the effects of changing the number of Node agents Inputs: < n-boids, n, visible?, max-scen? >
Setup procedures: < setup>
Go procedures: <go>
Repetition: 50
Inputs:
n-boids: 50
n: [100→ 100→1000]
visible?: true
max-scen?:false
Stop condition: Ticks=1000
Final commands: None
Experiment vary-boids: Experiment for noting the effects of changing the number of Boid agents
Inputs: < n-boids, n, visible?, max-scen? >
Setup procedures: < setup>
Go procedures: <go>
Repetition: 50
Inputs:
n-boids: [100→ 100→1000]
n: 1000
visible?: true
max-scen?:false
Stop condition: Ticks=1000
Final commands: None
- 174 -
5.3 Results and Discussion
In this section, we present the detailed results and discussion based on the complex net-
work model design as well as the simulation experiments proposed earlier in the case study
specification model.
5.3.1 Complex Network Analysis of the Network sub-model
We start by performing manipulation of the network shown earlier in Figure 52. The
first analysis is by calculation of the degree centrality measure discussed in detail earlier in
Chapter 2. Once the degree measure has been calculated for each node, it is subsequently
loaded/added to the corresponding node as an attribute. Subsequently this centrality meas-
ure is used to first resize and then colorize each node. The final visualized network is
shown in Figure 54.
- 175 -
Figure 54: Complex Network Model of Boids and WSN simulation nodes resized and colorized accord-
ing to degree centrality
Here, the first point to note is that we can clearly note peculiar characteristics of this
ABM visually without needing to look at the source code specifically. If another complex
network of a different ABM were constructed, it might have significantly different charac-
teristics. Now, firstly, we note the size of the “procedures” node, which is larger and darker
than other nodes because of the large number of procedures in this particular model. There
are also several “forever” and “Reporter” procedures which have resulted in larger node
sizes for these as well. We can also note how the network sub-model allows an examina-
tion of the agent-breeds and their respective attributes. Finally, the global variables as well
as the two behavior space experiments are visible in the network sub-model.
While the degree centrality gives an interesting overview of the network, there are other
quantitative measures which give further topological details as shall be examined next in
terms of detailed CNA. Next, we calculate various quantitative network measures of the
complex network presented in Table 19. One way of looking at this table is considering
this as a digital network footprint of this particular ABM. Thus, another ABM could possi-
bly have a completely different network footprint thus allowing for a quantitative similarity
analysis and comparison similar to the use of minutia and other features extracted from
human fingerprints for use in person identification and fingerprint indexing systems[197].
Table 19 Table of Eccentricity, Betweenness and Degree Centrality measures of the complex network
Id Eccentricity (%) Betweenness (%) Degree (%)
ABM 15.36 0.00 4.44
Agent-Attributes 0.00 0.00 1.11
Agent-Breeds 3.20 8.85 3.33
Agents 3.36 6.19 3.33
Align 0.00 0.00 1.11
Argumented 3.84 5.31 3.33
average-flockmate-heading 0.00 0.00 1.11
average-heading-towards-flockmates 0.00 0.00 1.11
- 176 -
Boid 0.00 0.00 2.22
Boid-Attributes 5.76 0.00 3.33
Boids-Near 0.00 0.00 1.11
BS-Expts 3.84 1.77 3.33
Cohere 0.00 0.00 1.11
data-of 0.00 0.00 1.11
do-plot 0.00 0.00 1.11
Flockmates 0.00 0.00 1.11
Forever 3.84 5.31 3.33
Globals 5.76 5.31 3.33
Go 0.00 0.00 1.11
go80 0.00 0.00 1.11
init-node 0.00 0.00 1.11
InputGlobals 7.68 7.08 5.56
make-boids 0.00 0.00 1.11
make-reg-wsn 0.00 0.00 1.11
make-wsn 0.00 0.00 1.11
max-scen? 0.00 0.00 1.11
move-boids 0.00 0.00 1.11
N 0.00 0.00 1.11
n-boids 0.00 0.00 1.11
nearest-neighbor 0.00 0.00 1.11
Node 2.88 7.96 2.22
Node-Attributes 3.84 7.08 3.33
OutputGlobals 0.00 0.00 1.11
Procedures 20.16 37.17 17.78
Reporter 5.76 7.96 4.44
Reporter-Argumented 14.72 0.00 2.22
sensed? 0.00 0.00 1.11
sensor-data 0.00 0.00 1.11
Separate 0.00 0.00 1.11
Setup 0.00 0.00 1.11
turn-away 0.00 0.00 1.11
turn-towards 0.00 0.00 1.11
vary-boids 0.00 0.00 1.11
vary-sensors 0.00 0.00 1.11
visible? 0.00 0.00 1.11
wsn-sense 0.00 0.00 1.11
- 177 -
Figure 55: Plot showing the Degree Centrality
The degree centrality analysis is plotted in Figure 55. The first point to note from this
analysis is that the degree centrality of the “procedures” node is the highest. The second
highest degree centrality is the “input-globals”. These represent the inputs which are en-
tered from the NetLogo user interface model.
Next, the plot showing the eccentricity centrality is shown in Figure 56. Here, we note
that the highest eccentricity centrality value is again for “Procedures” node. However, the
second highest centrality node is that of “ABM” itself followed closely by “Reporter-
Argumented” which depicts such procedures which have both reporters as well as argu-
ments. This is followed by “InputGlobals”.
- 178 -
Figure 56: Plot showing the eccentricity centrality
Finally, the plot showing the betweenness centrality[198] is shown in Figure 57. In the
case of betweenness centrality, following “Procedures” which has the highest centrality
value, we find “Agent-Breeds” to have the second highest value followed by “Reporter”,
“Node”, “InputGlobals” and “Node-Attributes”.
- 179 -
Figure 57: Plot showing the betweenness centrality measure
The implications of these network topological measures are numerous. Firstly, as dis-
cussed earlier, having a network allows for a visualization-based analysis and comparison
of various agent-based models without resorting to the source code. Secondly, quantitative
measures can be used to create a network footprint database of models for a repository of
different ABMs corresponding to numerous multidisciplinary studies.
5.3.2 Simulation Measurements
While the previous section discussed the results of the CNA of the network sub-model
of the case study, starting from this sub-section, we focus on the simulation experiments
and their results. We note that the key measurement in this set of simulations is “Sensed”
(represented below by S (t) ). Sensed is the mathematical aggregation (sum) of measure-
ments of all sensors at any given time t. So, being a binary sensor, every time a sensor
turns on, it results in an increase in the Sensed value. Thus, Sensed would always be less
- 181 -
s
than or equal to the total number of available sensors in the world at that instance ( Ns
(t) )
as follows in equation(2.6).
S (t ) N (t ) (2.6)
If n d
(t) represents the state of a single sensor which is detecting “boids” in its proxim-
ity, from a total of i active sensors at a given time, S (t) would be translated as the sum of
values of all currently sensing and active proximity sensors formally defined as follows in
equation (2.7):
d =i
S (t ) = nd (t )
d = 0
(2.7)
5.3.3 Results from Simulation Visualization
In this section, we give a detailed overview and discussion of the simulation results
from the agent-based model constructed using the pseudocode-based specification model.
We start by giving the details of how flocking boid agents are visualized in the simulation
model. In the following Figure 58a, we can note the boids are in the simulation shown here
as “bees”. Grey sensor node agents are deployed randomly in the simulation. However,
those sensor nodes which are close to the Boid agents detect them and change the color and
size to black.
- 180 -
Figure 58:(a) shows unflocked “boids” while (b) shows flocked “boids” and the sensor nodes sensing
the boids, show up as black on the screen.
With the passage of time, we note in Figure 58b that the boids flock together considera-
bly and the number of sensors detecting the boids has greatly reduced. In other words,
from the simulation model, we can directly correlate how the Sensed measured value
should correspond and vary with flocking.
While the above figures demonstrated the concept of detection and sensing of the binary
sensors, we need to validate the simulation parameters by checking to see if the simulation
actually works. This is performed visually in Figure 59a and b. Here, the simulation execu-
tion has been performed by turning on the tracks for the mobile Boid agents and removing
the visible sensors and all other agents from the simulation screen. We can note here that at
the start of the simulation, the Boid agent tracks are more or less random and not coherent.
However, in the later case, the Boids have flocked together and while the overall move-
ment of the flocks might be considered as random, the agents have flocked in particular
ways towards directions followed by the nearest Boids giving the example of an intelligent
emergent collective behavior of flocking.
- 182 -
Figure 59: Sensed Motion tracks of “boids” showing emergence of flocking behavior (a) Unflocked (b)
Flocked
5.3.4 Quantitative results
As discussed earlier, there were two key experiments in this case study. The first was to
test hypotheses related to the sensing of Boid agents with respect to a variation in the total
number of Boids whereas the second experiment was related to the examination of meas-
urements in relation to variation to the total number of sensors. In this section, we give
detailed analysis of the simulation results.
To start with, the descriptive statistics of “vary-boids” experiment are given in Table 20.
We can note here that the total number of simulation steps were close to 0.5 million. The
total simulation runs “Runnum” were 500 where each run was repeated 50 times to ensure
that the results would minimize stochastic effects of the simulation experiments. Each ex-
periment was executed for 1000 steps. The Sensed measurement varied from a value of 118
to 999 with a mean value of around 670 and a standard deviation of around 244. Here we
can also note that the number of sensor Node agents was set to a constant value of 1000
while the number of Boid agents was varied from 100 to 1000 with increment of 100.
- 183 -
Table 20 Descriptive Statistics of vary-boids experiment
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Runnum 500500 1 500 250.50 144.337
n-boids 500500 100 1000 550.00 287.228
N 500500 1000 1000 1000.00 .000
Step 500500 0 1000 500.00 288.964
Sensed 500500 118 999 670.48 244.277
Valid N (listwise) 500500
We can note the descriptive statistics of experiment “vary-sensors” given in Table 21. In
contrast to the first experiment set, we can observe here that firstly the variation in the
Sensed value is considerably different from the previous set of experiments varying from 1
to 267. The total number of experiments is still 1000 but the number of Boid agents is set
to a constant value of 50. In contrast, the number of sensor Node agents varies from 100 to
1000. Each simulation was executed for a duration of 1000 simulation steps (or simulation
seconds).
Table 21 Descriptive statistics of experiment vary-sensors
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Runnum 500500 1 500 250.50 144.337
n-boids 500500 50 50 50.00 .000
N 500500 100 1000 550.00 287.228
Step 500500 0 1000 500.00 288.964
Sensed 500500 1 267 63.46 37.980
Valid N (listwise) 500500
- 184 -
5.3.5 Graphs
The previous sub-section gave details of the simulation experiments. In this section, we
use graphs as a means of evaluation of results obtained from the above two set of simula-
tion experiments.
To start with we first plot a 95% Confidence Interval plot of the Sensed value with a
variation in the number of Boid agents as shown in Figure 60. Looking at this graph, we
can see the bigger picture since we can note here that there is actually a variation in the
sensed value with the number of Boids. As the number of Boids increase, the Sensed value
also increases verifying that the model for sensing is working correctly. However, it should
also be noted that the variation in the Sensed value is not linear. This nonlinearity is essen-
tially a validation of the hypothesis discussed earlier in this chapter regarding the case
study noting there is a high level of intrinsic complexity in the mixing of two different cas
systems to form a heterogeneous cas model. The graph used is an error graph. The fact that
each point is actually having a very small set of high and low values shows the fact that
this is a consistent phenomenon from this particular case study.
In this graph, we noted how the Sensed value varied with a variation in the number of
Boid agents. Next, we want to evaluate this phenomenon further. So, we plot the mean val-
ue of Sensed vs. simulation time.
- 185 -
Figure 60: 95% Confidence Interval plot of sensed vs. number of boids
However, to ensure that we are not looking at a particular set of instances of the simula-
tion and that the hypothesis is valid for a large variation of the simulation experiments, we
plot mean values for different number of Boid agents as shown in Figure 61.
Here, the first thing we can note from this chart is that in general, with the passage of
time, as the Boids tend to flock over time, the sensed value keeps on decreasing. In other
words, the hypothesis that we developed earlier while examination of the visualization of
the simulation discussed earlier about sensing is thus proven valid here. The second obser-
vation we can note here is that the variation in the Sensed value over time is more
considerable when the number of Boid agents is smaller. With an increase in the number of
Boid agents, due to a constraint of the simulation space limitation, the variation in the
Sensed value appears to be small but noticeable. So, we can infer another hypothesis that
- 186 -
even with a large number of Boids, flocking can still be detected with a relatively high de-
gree of sensitivity.
Next, we note the interesting perturbations in the simulation experiments with the num-
ber of Boid agents visible more clearly at 500, 600 and 700 at time steps from 350 to 700.
These interesting nonlinear effects are again a demonstration of the internal nonlinearities
of this heterogeneous cas system. Thus, while emergent behavior of flocking is observable
and quantifiable at the global scale from this graph, there are significant small nonlineari-
ties which might not be observable if only that section of the graph was to be used as a test
case.
Figure 61: Mean value of sensed over time with different number of boids
This also demonstrates the effectiveness of the use of agent-based modeling in general
and the particular DREAM methodology in particular, showing how it allowed for a detec-
- 187 -
tion of complex global emergent behavior based on nonlinear interactions of a large num-
ber of components.
In the previous two graphs, we evaluated the effects of a variation of the number of
Boid agents in the simulation. Next, we focus on experiments where the number of Boids
is constant but the number of sensor Node agents varies. While the previous set of experi-
ments gave consistent results testifying to the testing and validation of several hypotheses
relating to sensing, we next want to verify and infer new hypotheses regarding the number
of sensors. In other words, we want to validate that the previous results were valid in the
case of a large variation in the number of sensor Node agents and were not a manifestation
of the particular setting of the number of sensor Node agents.
Figure 62: 95% Confidence Interval graph of Sensed with a variation in the number of sensors
- 188 -
The first graph that we evaluate here is a 95% confidence interval error graph shown in
Figure 62. This graph shows a straight line. In this case, the straight line is a very good in-
dication because it shows that the results of the Sensed value from the previous simulations
are all valid. The change in the number of sensors does not affect the results and thus the
results were all consistent and valid.
The next graph is useful as an extension of the previous graph. In this case, we plot the
mean values of Sensed against simulation time. We also plot multiple number of sensors in
the same graph so that we can see the net effects of sensor Node agents in the simulation.
The important hypothesis here to test is whether or not the hypothesis regarding sensing
nodes holds as sensor nodes are losing their battery power. Thus we note here that the vari-
ation of Sensed value still holds over time.
Figure 63: Mean Sensed value vs. simulation time with a variation in the number of sensors
- 189 -
What is really interesting here is the fact that even with a relatively small number of
sensor Node agents (100), the flocking can still be detected or “sensed” thus further vali-
dating the hypothesis that the binary sensors can actually behave intelligent collectively
and detect flocking behavior of the Boid agents. However, we can also note that if the
number of sensor Node agents increases, the variation in the initial Sensed value to the fi-
nal value is more pronounced. In other words, this helps verify the simulation further that it
is working correctly and performing the expected behavior.
5.3.6 Significance of findings
The significance of the results of these simulation experiments can be noted by the number
of possible applications as a result of developing a better understanding of this hybrid cas
system. In short, if randomly deployed sensors can be used to detect apparently distributed
mobile flocking, then some possible applications can be given as follows:
1. Sensing can be used for the identification of collective behavior of people using an
image processing or infrared approach. In other words, this technique can be used
to detect any group of people such as a group of “shoppers” flocking to a particular
set of shops in a mall even though there is a large crowd of thousands of other peo-
ple moving around.
2. This same approach can be used to detect a group of malicious attackers moving
through a crowd thus allowing for the detection of the group “flocking” without
cohering too much as that close grouping might have raised suspicions of the secu-
rity personnel.
3. Another application of this approach is in the domain of detecting a group of stealth
aircraft flocking towards a common mission. Stealth aircrafts are known to be in-
visible to radars in certain conditions. However these aircrafts are physically visible
- 191 -
to the naked eye or in the visible light. As such, while it is difficult to infer a coor-
dinated operation based on only the detection of a single aircraft, if there were a
randomly deployed group of sensors with cameras or other sensing equipment
pointing to the sky, these wirelessly connected sensors could essentially detect a
group of stealth aircraft flocking and moving towards a common goal. Using sim-
ple shape detection image processing algorithms, each sensor can simply note if a
“large” object passes over them. And this detection of “proximity” could be used to
quantify flocking at a monitoring station collecting the data from these sensors.
5.3.7 Critical Comparison of DREAM with other approaches
The previous sections were related to discussion of the simulation experiments and re-
sults of the case study. Here, we relate the DREAM approach in the bigger context of
describing agent-based models.
As discussed earlier in this chapter, DREAM approach is based on an informal method-
ology which allows for conversion between a complex network model, a digital footprint
based on centralities and a pseudocode-based specification model. This conversion is es-
sentially tied in with an informal validation process which can be followed by means of
face validation, code walkthroughs and testing.
While, to the best of our knowledge, there is no other well-known approach in literature
which describes agent-based models descriptively and quantitatively similar to our pro-
posed DREAM approach, here we perform a comparison of the approach to two somewhat
related approaches of knowledge transfer and description of agent-based models:
5.3.7.1 Template Software approach
A common approach to sharing models, as noted by Santa Fe Institute’s Agent-based
modeling software Swarm’s wiki page, is the template software approach[130]. This is ba-
- 190 -
sically a code-based approach for comparison of models. The way this works is that tem-
plate software for NetLogo, Swarm, Repast and MASON etc. are publicized on the
website. Interested researchers download and adapt the source code for their particular us-
age. The website defines template software as code which has been designed with the
following features in mind:
- For use in new models by means of copying and modification.
- As a means of tutorial-based teaching/learning.
- As examples of programming tasks.
- In some cases, for comparison of various ABM tools/software.
As such, it is clear here that templates are useful but, each of them is firstly based on
code and thus specific to single platforms/languages. They also are not suitable for non-
code or quantitative comparison of models, as proposed via the DREAM approach. The
benefits of moving away from pure code to other models which do not require detailed
knowledge of programming is clearly obvious here since at times, the designer of the simu-
lation (Simulation Specialist) might be a different person than the cas researcher.
5.3.7.2 ODD approach
Grimm et al. have proposed the Overview, Design concepts, and Details (ODD) proto-
col which is a text-based descriptive approach for documenting agent-based models. This
approach has been demonstrated in ecological and social sciences [199]. The initial ODD
proposed protocol[101] was subsequently updated and is now known as the “Updated
ODD protocol”. As compared with the proposed modeling approach, there are certain key
differences given as follows:
Firstly, the description in ODD is textual. In other words, it can be considered as a way
of describing agent-based models using a checklist of proposed headings. As such, it does
- 192 -
not allow a quantitative comparison such as the use of Complex Network methods as
demonstrated in the proposed modeling methodology.
1. ODD does not offer a visualization-based approach where researchers can visu-
alize an entire ABM to compare it with other ABMs.
2. ODD also does not offer a one-to-one translation of models from the actual
model to the source code. The proposed DREAM methodology allows this by
means of an informal translation process.
3. ODD also does not allow for detailed descriptions of algorithms.
Being textual and not using any pseudocode, flow charts, state charts or other algorithm
description models, it is difficult to see how a model described using ODD can be repro-
duced exactly. As Edmond and Hales [200] have previously noted that “. . .the description
of the simulation should be sufficient for others to be able to replicate (i.e. re-implement)
the simulation”. Other problems with purely textual descriptions of agent-based models
have been noted by Wilensky and Rand[145] who describe the difficulties in the replication
of results based on textual description of Axelrod. It is pertinent to mention here that Axel-
rod is one of the pioneers of agent-based modeling in Social Sciences [25] with
publications in the domain dating back to the 1980’s[201]. Wilensky and Rand note that
“In the replication experiment detailed herein, differences were discovered between the
Wilensky-Rand model and the Axelrod-Hammond model, and the replicated model had to
be modified to produce the original results. Moreover, the process that was required to de-
termine that the replication was successful was complicated and involved unforeseen
problems.” Thus to summarize, while textual descriptions are effective in giving basic ide-
as about a simulation, it is difficult to directly implement these ideas without the use of
pseudocode as proposed by the descriptive ABM methodology in this chapter.
- 193 -
5.4 Conclusions
In this chapter, we have proposed DREAM, an extension of exploratory agent-based
modeling. DREAM allows for quantitative, visual and pseudocode based comparison and
description of agent-based models. We have described a detailed case study as a means of
demonstrating the effectiveness of using DREAM for modeling and simulation of various
cas problems and inferring hypotheses. We have also critically reviewed DREAM with
other prevalent approaches in the domain of agent-based modeling.
In the next chapter, we complete the last part of the proposed unified framework by de-
veloping a methodology of Verification and Validation of agent-based models using in-
simulation validation. The proposed Virtual Overlay Multiagent System (VOMAS) ap-
proach is demonstrated by application on three different and separate case studies
demonstrating its effectiveness in a number of multidisciplinary application case studies.
- 194 -
6 Proposed Framework: Validated Agent-based
Modeling Level
In the previous chapter, we explored Descriptive Agent-based Modeling. DREAM
allowed the developing of a non-code description of the ABM using a combination of a
complex network model, a quantitative “footprint” of the ABM as well as a pseudocode-
based specification model. However, while it solved some of the key methodological prob-
lems of ABM design, the proposed framework would still be amiss, if it did not allow for a
methodology of developing “trustable” models. Trust in any simulation model is arbitrary
because the fact of the matter is that a simulation model, however well-designed, is only as
good as its correlation with the real-world or “imagined”7 phenomenon, which it is ex-
pected to map. So, quite simply, a simulation model needs to be first verified so that it is
working as expected and then validated to ensure it models the simulated phenomena close
enough at the required level of abstraction as dictated by the particular requirements of
simulation. However, as discussed earlier in Chapter 2, this particular type of verification
and validation in the case of agent-based modeling cannot be considered in the same light
as other more traditional simulation models. Next, we give a detailed description of the
problem statement of verification and validation of agent-based modeling in the next sec-
tion.
7 Imagined such as in computer games and entertainment software, where the simulation is specifically de-
signed not to reflect the real world.
- 195 -
6.1 Problem statement
As discussed earlier in Chapter 2, while the problem of verification and validation is
applicable to any modeling and simulation approach, in the case of agent-based modeling
of complex adaptive systems, there are certain peculiarities which make their validation
different from that of traditional simulation models:
- The simulation design might not be required to develop a quantitative validation
model because the phenomena might be observable and not easily quantifiable. In
other words techniques such as Statistical validation or Empirical validation[140]
used alone, might not always be the most appropriate choice for validation [144].
- Fagiolo et al.[202] note that ABMs have characteristics such as bottom-up model-
ing, heterogeneity, bounded rationality and nonlinear networked interactions which
make them especially difficult to validate in the same way as other simulation
models. In addition, they note that two of the key problems in ABMs are “the lack
of standard technologies for constructing and analyzing agent-based models” and
“the problematic relationship between agent-based models and empirical data”.
In this chapter, we propose a solution to these problems by proposing a generalized
methodology for in-simulation verification and validation of agent-based models using a
Virtual Overlay Multiagent System (VOMAS). Our approach is based on existing ideas of
verification and validation from different Agent-based Computing disciplines such as So-
cial Sciences, Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence to develop a validation
approach which can be customized for application to multidisciplinary cas case studies. As
a means of demonstration of the generalized applicability of our proposed approach to var-
ious cas domains, we present three separate example case studies from ecological
modeling, WSNs and social sciences.
- 196 -
The rest of the chapter is structured as follows: First we give a description of the gener-
alized methodology of in-simulation validation. Next, we present experimental design for
the development of VOMAS for three example case studies. Next, in the results and dis-
cussion section, we present the simulation results followed by a detail discussion of
benefits of using the VOMAS methodology in the validation of the particular case study
model. We also critically compare the VOMAS methodology with other validation ap-
proaches of ABMs. Finally we conclude the chapter.
6.2 Proposed validate agent-based modeling methodology
In this section, we develop the generalized VOMAS methodology. To start with, we first
examine how the problem of verification and validation of computer simulations is consid-
ered by simulation experts.
A generalized view of the verification and validation process of computational simula-
tions has been presented by Sargent[203] as shown in Figure 64. This diagram
encompasses the conceptual model as well as the computerized model. As we can note
here, the validity of the conceptual model is performed by means of analysis and modeling.
Whereas from the conceptual model to the computerized simulation model, programming
and implementation can be evaluated by performing computerized model verification.
However, to ensure that the computerized model is a true representation of the actual prob-
lem, a set of thorough experimentation is needed since it allows for a confirmation of the
operational validity. Thus in the case of ABMs, the proposed methodology has to allow for
a flexible means of performing computerized model verification as well as operational and
conceptual validation.
- 197 -
Figure 64: A view of the modeling process, figure adapted from Sargent [203]
The validated agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework can be noted in
Figure 65. In this level, the development of the agent-based model is followed similar to a
Software Engineering approach. As such, the SME and the SS work together in teams to
develop requirements for the validation of the proposed model by determining invariant
contracts to be added to the simulation. These invariant contracts allow the model to be
customized for any validation paradigm and thus can be used based on the particular case
studies. Based on these meetings, the SS develops the cas ABM by adding a Virtual Over-
lay Multiagent System (VOMAS) which allow in-simulation validation of the agent-based
model using the invariant contracts.
- 198 -
Figure 65 Validated agent-based modeling framework level
6.2.1 Detailed overview of origins of VOMAS concepts
The proposed VOMAS-based methodology has basis in three different set of basic ide-
as. These ideas originate from cooperative multiagent systems, software engineering and
social sciences and are noted below as follows:
- 199 -
6.2.1.1 VOMAS basis in Software Engineering Team concepts
The temporal and interactive structure of building a VOMAS ties in closely with how
Software Engineering projects are constructed because the Software Engineering discipline
is entirely focused on developing software based on teams of various sizes. The idea stems
from the fact that simulations are also pieces of software however, to the best of our
knowledge; there is no standard methodology which uses Software Engineering practices
in the development of agent-based simulations. The VOMAS approach is thus structured
on the basis of software engineering and requires the Simulation Specialist (SS) to work
with the domain exert end user researcher or Subject Matter Expert (SME) in large scale
research simulation projects. This leads to an iterative approach where the SS develops dif-
ferent models and diagrams (e.g. using DREAM approach) and gets approval from the
client SME to proceed in each step.
A typical software development team can consist of various roles such as Manager,
Software Engineer, Analysts and Quality Assurance Engineer. While one or more team
members might have the same hat or role, or might have different roles depending upon the
stage in a particular project, all work together with the end-users to develop a piece of
software in line with the user requirements[204].
In the proposed methodology, the end users are nontechnical but multidisciplinary re-
searchers who are experts in their own domains. Thus while they are not assumed to have
advanced knowledge of modeling and simulation domains, they can intelligently work with
the SS to develop and test the simulation models. While they might not correctly identify
exactly what features are to be instilled in the software, they might be able to give con-
structive feedback on exactly how the simulation model can be proven correct in terms of
their domain-specific terminology. Thus an ecologist would be able to look at a particular
fire model and affirm that this is exactly how fires propagate in a particular area and also
- 200 -
note as to what would be needed to make a model be realistic. In addition, a Biologist re-
searcher investigating precancerous tumors might be able to observe at a tumor growth
model and affirm if the model is looking close to the implicit mental model well-known to
biologists and exactly what should the SS be looking for in an ABM tumor model for vali-
dation. Therefore, by means of using different models such as those earlier proposed in
DREAM modeling, the end user researcher SME can gradually becomes comfortable with
the software concepts helping the SS in developing a simulation model which qualifies the
user requirements.
6.2.1.2 VOMAS basis in software engineering concepts
Traon et al. [205]note that Meyer’s “Design by contract” concept[206] allows for easily
including formal specification elements (referred here specifically to software-based invar-
iants, pre-conditions and post-conditions) into a software design. Using these built-in and
programmed contracts, software engineers use these software constructs as “embedded,
online oracles”. The proposed methodology uses the design by contract concept. It extends
the idea to the domain of agent-based simulation models of cas. It allows for building in-
variants based on pre- and post-conditions inside agent-based models by having VOMAS
agents inside the simulation model of cas which dynamically observe the simulation and
provide visual and log-based feedback to the SS. An invariant I is technically defined as
follows:
“If a set of pre-conditions Cpre holds in an ABM M, then M is guaranteed to undergo a
state change which will result in the post-conditions Cpost .”
Thus periodically extracted information from the simulation model can then be used to
evaluate different invariants, as and when required by the particular case study under guid-
ance from the SME. Thus, unlike the design by contract model of software design, where
- 201 -
contract becomes an integral part of the software model, these agents need to be designed
to use minimal system resources. VOMAS agents can thus be designed to act on their own
to periodically evaluate the simulation state and results.
As a consequence of invariants, we can also define an exception E as follows:
“If pre-conditions Cpre do not hold in an ABM M, then M is not guaranteed to undergo
any particular state change of interest to the SME”
Thus, such an exception behavior can be noted by means of execution of the simulation
model. The reduction in the number of exceptions generated from the simulation experi-
ments is thus an indicator of the improvement in the validation of the model. In addition,
exceptions can be used to validate the Invariant itself. This can be performed by means of
limiting all the conditions in a model to a specific set thus allowing for a focus on only re-
moving just one of the pre-conditions. Now, with different variations of other inputs,
exceptions can be noted. Next the pre-condition can be inserted and this would allow for
the validation of the Invariant by a complete removal of the exceptions. This is shown
graphically in the following Figure 66. We can note here the process of designing and test-
ing Invariants by means of changing pre-conditions in the proposed methodology.
- 202 -
Figure 66: Design and testing of VOMAS Invariants by means of manipulation of the pre-conditions
6.2.1.3 VOMAS basis in multiagent system concepts
Panait and Luke [95] note that cooperative multiagent systems are a common paradigm
in multiagent models where different agents work together to a common goal. Our pro-
posed methodology has its third basis in the concept of cooperative agents. Thus, SME
can use any suitable combination of agents inside a ABM which satisfy the requirements of
validation. There are two possible extremes of this development. Either the developed
agents are part of the ABM themselves or else the agents are developed separately and
constitute agents observing the simulation from within simulation. The actual idea is to be
able to facilitate the SME in developing the validation model and would thus vary on a
case-to-case basis.
In other words, a VOMAS model built for one application domain or even one aspect of
an application domain could vary considerably from another VOMAS model built for a
different purpose. However, one primary design goal of VOMAS agents has to be so as not
to disturb the results of the simulation model since simulation results can be are very sensi-
Set Pre-Conditions Observe Post-
Conditions
Remove one
Pre-Condition
Implement
Invariants
Design
Invariants
Observe
Exceptions
- 203 -
Develop Model
Design (DREAM)
Develop Validation
Questions
Validate using
VOMAS
Meet with
SME
Execute Simula-
tions
Develop Invari-
ants
Develop in-
simulation
VOMAS
tive to computation. If the computation performed by the VOMAS agents is too extensive,
then it might end up disturbing the entire simulation. Thus care needs to be taken in the
development of the in-simulation validation model so that the agents periodically report
results without affecting the actual simulation. In addition, VOMAS agents must also use a
minimal of system resources to extract information. The diagram in Figure 67 gives details
of how the overall proposed in-simulation methodology is structured.
Figure 67: Methodology of building In-Simulation Validated ABMs
We can note here that the central activity of the proposed methodology is communica-
tion and collaboration with the SME. The methodology here is given from the perspective
of the SS. As such, every step of this methodology is linked with meeting and communica-
tion with the SME. How it can actually be made possible is by ensuring that the
methodology starts when the SME and SS meet and start to plan the simulation-based re-
search project. Collaboratively, the two teams of multidisciplinary researchers i.e. the
SMEs and the designers of the ABMs i.e. SS formally meet and develop the design of the
- 204 -
ABM e.g. using DREAM. Next, they discuss what would be good validation questions.
The validation questions should be succinct assisting the team to develop invariants along
with any needed pre- and post-conditions.
The next step in the methodology is to develop invariants along with the suitable pre-
and post- conditions. Finally the decision is to be made as to what are the specific agents
which will be part of the simulation. The questions at this stage depend on the particular
case study and would vary in different cases depending upon the level of computation re-
quired by the agents. So, in some cases the agents can be embedded in the actual
simulation while in other cases, the agents can be observing the simulation and validating
the invariants. Subsequently, the model is developed and gradually the invariants are added
to the ABM.
After adding each invariant, the model can be verified using the method for testing in-
variants using VOMAS presented earlier in Figure 66. After the basic testing, the invariants
can all be considered working and next the simulation experiments can be executed. The
results can subsequently be used by the team to evaluate the effectiveness of the ABM in
representation of the real-world phenomena
6.2.2 A Taxonomy of Agent-Based Validation techniques using VOMAS
In this sub-section, we examine some of the possible methods by means of which agent-
based models can be validated by means of using VOMAS as shown in Figure 68. Since
agent based models traditionally have one or more agents, what the physical implication in
the real-world is entirely up to the designer i.e. the SS. Agents act as elements or pieces in
a chess board and thus can be, at times, placed spatially in the simulation, where distance
between agents in the simulation is important either for reduction of clutter or else for a
concept of “distance” modeled by the designer. In other cases, non-spatial concepts could
- 205 -
In-simulation V&V of ABM
Non-Visual Visual
Non-Spatial log-based Spatial
Network-based
Distance-based
Placement based
be used in the model since spatial concepts might not make sense in that particular applica-
tion case study or discipline. In case of spatial models, it is also entirely possible that the
exact distance may not be important, but the links between agents could be important. A
detailed description of each of these follows.
Figure 68: A Taxonomy of Agent Based Validation techniques
1. Visual Validation:
Visual validation is related to the face validation technique[203] where the model
animation or results can be validated by the SME to see if the behavior is similar to that
expected in the actual system.
2. Non-visual Validation:
Non-visual validation is a generalized methodology of validation which would be
anything that is unrelated to purely face validation concepts.
a. Spatial Validation:
- 206 -
In spatial validation, the placement of agents in the simulation is im-
portant. Thus either the agents are connected based on a network or else it is
that the agents are place on a 2-D or 3-D plane and their distance or placement
is important in terms of usage in the particular case study.
b. Non-Spatial Validation:
In non-spatial validation, the validation can be performed by means of de-
veloping extensive logs. These can ensure all data is stored for future usage.
While this kind of validation allows for data storage, it also can result in some
problems. Firstly, the size of the logs might grow considerably. And with size,
the time to store the log might interfere with the simulation time. In addition,
data might be too difficult to analyze due to significant size of logs.
6.3 Case studies: Experimental Design and Implementation
In the previous section, we developed the general methodology of in-simulation verifi-
cation and validation of ABMs. In this section, we present the overview, experimental
design and implementation details for three separate case studies from different disciplines
to demonstrate the generalized applicability of the proposed validation methodology and
framework. The first discipline is in the domain of ecological modeling where we develop
a forest fire model for evaluation of the effects of forest fires on the overall forest structure
as well. The second area is in the domain of WSNs, where we develop a specialized com-
plex network model of multi-hop WSNs for observing the forest fire effects demonstrating
the applicability of the proposed methodology in different ways. The third model is from
the domain of quantitative social sciences in the domain of developing a complex network-
based model of researcher evolution over time by means.
- 207 -
6.3.1 Case Study I: Ecological modeling of forest fire spread and forest re-growth
In the first case study, we explore the use of VOMAS in a Cellular Automata (CA)
model of a forest fire simulation. To start with, we first evolve a basic and subsequently an
advanced CA model of the forest fire spread. Next, validation questions and subsequently a
VOMAS model for cross-model validation is developed using the Fire Weather Index
(FWI), a standard mathematical model for forest fire prediction. In the next section, we
describe in detail the model and experimental design.
6.3.1.1 Basic simulation Model
We start by developing a forest fire model. In the real world, a forest fire spread can be
based on different parameters such as:
1. The cause of the fire
2. The wind speed and direction
3. The amount of rain and snow in the past
4. The humidity level
5. The current rate of rain or snow
6. The particular type of Trees
7. The structural aspects of the forest
To develop the basic forest fire model, we thus need to develop several modules incre-
mentally as given in the next sub-sections.
6.3.1.1.1 Forest Creation Module
In this module, our goal is to develop the forest scenario. Our basic model extends upon
the Forest Fire model given in NetLogo model library[207] which is a simple model with
- 208 -
no advanced parameters for configuration or any means of realistic forest fire simulation.
As such, we first develop a forest made up of trees covering a random set of locations.
However, to ensure we can control the tree coverage, we give the tree coverage model a
probability (Pcov). Based on the value of Pcov, which varies from 0 to 100, we can build an
environment model with trees. With a Pcov value of 68%, we can see the forest model as
follows in Figure 69. We can also note here that the wind direction is made visible by
means of a dial at the top.
6.3.1.1.2 Basic Fire module
After the forest has been created, we can develop a baseline fire model. The way
the fire module works is that at a given random probability of fire (Pfire), a fire can start at a
random location. Now, the fire has three distinct states:
o Started
o Spreading
o Dying
In the “started” state, fire has just been initiated. After the fire has been created, it is
given the direction of spread based on the “Wind direction” parameter. After creation, the
fire next moves to the “Spreading” stage. In the spreading stage, we use a parameter “tic”.
This parameter is initially zero but as fire spreads, this parameter gradually increases. Thus
depending upon the parameter “intensity”, the fire keeps growing up until it reaches the
“intensity” which serves as a threshold to stopping the fire. The “Dying stage” gradually
serves as a means of stopping the fires and is reflected by a gradual change of color.
- 209 -
Figure 69: View of the forest before the fire
The effects of a fire can be seen in Figure 70. We can note here that the edges of the fire
are a different color than the center of the fire because it represents that the trees have been
destroyed in the center by now.
- 211 -
Figure 70: Forest fire spread
In addition to being able to simulate single fires, the baseline model can support more
than one fire as shown in Figure 71.
6.3.1.2 Advanced Forest Fire model version 1
While the basic or baseline forest fire model gives an interesting simulation, it does not
give any realistic fire results except the use of wind direction. We next develop an ad-
vanced forest fire model. In the advanced forest module, we want to simulate long term
fires so we want to model the effects of tree re-growth other time. In other words, while
forest fires come and destroy the forest, periodically the tree cover grows as well. So, to be
able to evaluate the advanced patterns formed due to the effects of various fires as well as
the tree re-growth, we develop tree re-growth capability.
- 210 -
Figure 71 Baseline forest fire model with two consecutive fires
Based on a re-growth percentage and a re-growth period, our simulation can be devel-
oped which can give rise to more advanced effects in forest ecological simulation. As an
example of tree re-growth based patterns with three different random forest fires, we see
the pattern as shown in Figure 72.
- 212 -
Figure 72 Advanced forest fire model version 1 with tree re-growth
6.3.1.3 Advanced Forest Fire model version 2
To make the forest fire scenario more realistic, we add several different scenarios and
parameters. The first of these is the effect of rainfall as shown in Figure 73. The effects of
rainfall are that the humidity of the location of the forest where rain is occurring is in-
creased by a random value over time.
- 213 -
Figure 73 Advanced forest fire model version 2 with rainfall in part of the forest
In addition, we allow for coupling the effects of forest fires along with snowfall as
shown in Figure 74. The physical impact of the snowfall is that the humidity as well as the
temperature of the location is affected over time e.g. with an increase in humidity level and
a decrease in temperature.
- 214 -
Figure 74 Advanced forest fire model version 2 with snowfall effects
6.3.1.4 Validation Question
Up until now, we have developed the advanced forest fire model which contains forest
creation, forest re-growth, weather effects simulation and forest fire simulation modules.
The goal of this section is to demonstrate how this model can subsequently be validated by
means of building an associated VOMAS model. Thus, while the entire model can be de-
scribed in a real case study in the form of a DREAM model described earlier in the last
chapter, here we only focus on the validation part. As described earlier in the VOMAS
Methodology, we shall start by first writing our validation question in the model. Our key
validation question can thus be stated as follows:
- 215 -
Question: How can we validate that the developed forest fire model is representative of
actual forest fires?
Now, the way this could be practically answered is by looking for either a repository of
data for forest fires or else a standard forest fire model. By performing an examination of
previous literature such as [208] by Alexandridis et al., it becomes clear that while there is
data such as either the temperatures of forests or else data in terms of the final results of
fires, it is very difficult to get any data of the exact structural aspects of forest fire spread
over time. In other words, the data availability is limited to Geographical Information Sys-
tems (GIS) based data visible via satellites. This data does not demonstrate the micro-
dynamics of the forest fires. As such, instead of this approach, which would not have guar-
anteed model validity, we have to use a different approach. One possible approach in the
absence of real data is thus to perform cross-model validation or “docking” of the models
as noted by Axtell et al. in [209]. As such, here we use this approach but in contrast to Ax-
tell’s approach, which was to develop two different agent-based models, our ABM which
will be validated against a formal mathematical model of the FWI. FWI is a standard mod-
el in use by several countries including France and Canada. In France, the index has
previously been calculated and gradually updated for the last 40 years and similar practices
are prevalent in Canada as noted by Lawson et al. in [210]. Being such a stable Mathemati-
cal model thus allows FWI to be a suitable candidate for use in model validation.
The FWI is calculated using weather values input in a complex set of equations as noted
in [211] allowing prediction of forest fires[212]. In other words, FWI can be used to per-
form cross-validation of our simulation model.
- 216 -
6.3.1.5 Software Contract
The next step in our proposed methodology is to develop software contracts for the
simulation model. As such, based on the validation question that we have discussed in the
previous section, we can focus on the following contract:
Invariant Contract: If the pre-condition of a “tree is on fire” is true, then a post-
condition of “FWI value in the range of Fire Danger index” is true.
Thus, we need to be able to validate the FWI value in the simulation. Next we design
the VOMAS agents to cater for this validation.
6.3.1.6 VOMAS agent design
A naïve way of designing a VOMAS could be to have each cell calculate the FWI value
over time. However, practically speaking there is a problem in this implementation because
the FWI calculation requires calculation of almost 40 Mathematical equations (as we shall
examine next), a number of which require complex mathematical calculations such as ex-
ponential etc. So, if we were to execute a simulation that has an environment of only
300 300 and every cell of the simulation calculates the FWI in each simulation run, then
it would imply that for each simulation second, these equations would require
90000 40 = 3600000 calculations per simulation second. In other words, such an imple-
mentation would itself result in an overhead that might invalidate the entire basic
simulation. As such, this would defeat the whole purpose of the forest fire simulation. As
an alternative to this design, we thus propose using a random number of trees as VOMAS
agents which calculate the value of the FWI and validate the value against fires. In other
words, any trees, which have a FWI value in the range of fire danger index, might have
fire. In addition, any trees having fire should have an FWI value in the danger range.
- 217 -
Block 1 Fine Fuel
Moisture Code
FFMC
The actual calculation of FWI is based on items called the “Blocks”. The blocks are
given as follows in Figure 75. A brief description follows of the different components is
given as follows summarized from [1], [213].
Block 4Initial
Spread Index ISI
Block 5 Adjusted Duff
Moisture Code ADMC
Figure 75: FWI calculation, figure adapted from Wagner[1]
6.3.1.6.1 Fire Weather Index (FWI)
FWI [1] provides the assessment of the relative fire potential based on weather
conditions. It depends on several sub-components. It is primarily calculated from the Initial
Spread Index (ISI) and Build Up Index (BUI) to provide an estimate of the intensity of fire
spread. In general, FWI can be considered to indicate the fire intensity based on a combi-
nation of an expected rate of fire spread along with the total amount of fire fuel consumed.
Next, we discuss the sub-components needed to calculate FWI.
Block 6 Fire
Weather Index
FWI
Block 2 Duff
Moisture Code
DMC
Block 3 Drought
Code DC
- 218 -
6.3.1.6.2 Fine Fuel Moisture Code (FFMC)
FFMC represents the moisture contents of litter and fine fuels, 1-2cm deep, with a
typical fuel loading of about 5 tons per hectare. FFMC indicates the ease of ignition or in
other words, it formalizes the ignition probability.
6.3.1.6.3 Duff Moisture Code (DMC)
DMC is an indicator of the moisture content of the duff layer, which is essentially a
layer of compacted and organic matter in decomposing state. It predicts the probability of
fire ignition as a result of lightening. It is also representative of the rate of fuel consump-
tion.
6.3.1.6.4 Drought Code (DC)
Drought Code is an indicator of average moisture content of the deeper layers of
compacted organic matter. DC is indicative of long-term moisture conditions and deter-
mines fire resistance to extinguishing. It is also an indicator of fuel consumption.
6.3.1.6.5 Initial Spread Index (ISI)
ISI indicates the rate of fire spread immediately after ignition. In combines the
FFMC and wind speed to predict the expected rate of fire spread.
6.3.1.6.6 Build Up Index (BUI)
BUI index is a combination of the DMC and DC codes and it indicates the total
amount of fuel available for combustion. DMC has the bigger influence on the BUI.
- 219 -
d
w
o
l
6.3.1.6.7 Calculation of FWI
The details of the calculations pertinent to our simulation implementation are discussed
below however further details of these parameters are out of scope of and interest of this
thesis in general although they are publicly available in [211].
Block 1 is the Fine Fuel Moisture Code (FFMC) and is calculated based on the rainfall,
relative humidity, wind speed and the temperature as follows (F):
FFMC
mo = 147.2(101− Fo) / (59.5 + Fo)
rt = ro − 0.5
m = m + 42.5rf (e−100/(251−mo)
)(1− e−6.93/ rf )
r o
mr = m + 42.5rf (e−100/(251−mo)
)(1− e−6.93/ rf
) + 0.0015(mo −150)2 r 0.5
o f
E = 0.942H 0.679
+11e( H −100)/10
+ 0.18(21.1− T )(1− e−0.115H
)
E = 0.618H 0.753
+10e( H −100)/10
+ 0.18(21.1− T )(1− e−0.115H
)
K = 0.424[1− (H / 100)1.7
] + 0.0694W 0.5
[1− (H / 100)8 ]
Kd = ko * 0.581e0.0365T
k = 0.424[1− (100 − H / 100)1.7
] + 0.0694W 0.5
[1− (100 − H / 100)8 ]
Kw = k1* 0.581e0.0365T
m = E + (m − E )*10− Kd
d o d
m = E − (E − m )*10− Kw
w w o
F = 59.5(250 − m) / (147.2 + m)
Block 2 is the Duff Moisture Code (DMC). It is based on the rainfall, relative humidity
and the temperature. DMC (P) is calculated as follows:
- 221 -
o
o
DMC
re = 0.92ro −1.27
M = 20 + e(5.6348−Po/ 43.43)
b = 100 / 0.5 + 0.3Po
b = 14 −13ln Po
b = 6.2 ln Po −17.2
Mr = Mo +1000re / (48.77 + bre )
Pr = 244.72 − 43.43ln(Mr − 20)
k = 1.894(T +1.1)(100 − H )Le *10−6
P = Po (or Pr ) +100K
Block 3 is the Drought code (DC) and is based on rainfall value and the temperature.
DC (D) is calculated below as follows:
DC
rd = 0.83ro −1.27
Q = 800e− Do/ 400
Qr = Qo + 3.937rd
Dr = 400 ln(800 / Qr)
V = 0.36(T + 2.8) + Lf
D = Do(orDr) + 0.5V
Next, we note the Block 4, which represents the Initial Spread Index (ISI). ISI (R) is
calculated as follows based on the FFMC calculated earlier:
ISI
f (W ) = e0.0811W
f (F ) = 91.9e−0.1386m
[1+ m5.31
/ (4.93*107 )]
R = 0.208 f (W ) f (F )
Next, we calculated the Build-up index (BUI) or the Adjusted Duff Moisture Code
(ADMC) represented as U is calculated next as follows:
BUI
U = 0.8PD / (P + 0.4D)
U = P −[1− 0.8D / (P + 0.4D)][0.92 + (0.0114P)1.7
]
- 220 -
Finally these values are used to calculate the FWI as follows:
FWI
f (D) = 0.626U 0.809
+ 2
f (D) = 1000 / (25 +108.64e−0.023U
)
b = 0.1Rf (D)
ln S = 2.72(0.434 ln B)0.647
As can be seen, these calculations are necessary for the accurate calculation of the FWI
value in our case study. Thus, VOMAS agents will be performing these calculations as re-
quired. The results of the VOMAS experiments of the Forest Fire Simulation case study
will be further discussed in the results section.
6.3.2 Case Study II: Environmental Monitoring using Wireless Sensor Networks
In the previous case study, we developed a Forest Fire Simulation case study. In this se-
cond case study, our goal is to extend the previous case study and use a set of connected
wireless sensor network nodes to monitor the forest fires. As a means of getting to this
stage, we first need to develop a formal model for a randomly deployed WSN by choosing
one of the standard models.
Technically, a connected WSN is represented as a Graph or Network G = (V , E) . Where
V is the set of vertices and represents the sensor nodes while E (edges) represents the con-
nectivity of the nodes. Thus for any two nodes u, v V , (u, v) E if the sensor node u is
adjacent to v. The classical connectivity model for WSNs is the Unit Disk Graph
(UDG)[214] where if any two nodes are considered adjacent if and only if their Euclidean
distance is at most 1. The UDG [215] has been considered as unrealistic connectivity mod-
els. It also does not cater for the facts such as that real world sensors might not have Omni
directional antennas and also that any small obstacles might result in disconnection[188].
An advanced version of the UDG is the General Graph (GG) model which is a general un-
- 222 -
directed graph. As such, every node can be considered as an adjacent to every other node.
However, this model is again unrealistic because it can be too generous and thus it might
result in nodes which cannot be reached from a node having connections. As such, both
these models are considered as two extremes for realistic models. However, our proposed
simulation model for WSNs follows a flexible realistic version of network models which
has been considered as a reasonable model between the two extreme modeling paradigms
called the Quasi Unit Disk Graph (QUDG) proposed by Kuhn et al.[216]. Thus our WSN
model would be formally defined as follows:
Our proposed WSN model consists of nodes in a two dimensional Euclidean plane in
� 2 . All pairs of nodes with Euclidean distance for some given (0,1] are considered
adjacent. In addition, pairs of nodes between distances and 1 may or may not be neigh-
bors. It is a well-known fact that for = 1 , QUDG becomes a UDG[188]. As such,
building a QUDG using the NetLogo interface, we can see the simulation output shown as
follows in Figure 76.
Next, the models for forest creation, forest fire and the WSN simulation are integrated
resulted in a single model. This sensor model is able to extract useful information such as
temperature and other parameters from the location of the sensor inside the simulation en-
vironment. With a description of the basic connected WSN model, we next move to the
validation question part of the proposed methodology.
- 223 -
Figure 76: WSN network simulation as QUDG with n=200 sensor nodes
6.3.2.1 Validation Question
The simulation in this case study is based on a set of sensor nodes connected together.
In the previous chapter, we have simulated WSNs with a unit distance from the sink with
the goal of the WSN being solved using single hop communication. In that case, the nodes
did not require connectivity between each other for communications unlike the multi-hop
scenario in the current case study. Here, each node is expected to confirm the temperature,
humidity and other parameters from the local area and then report to a remote base station.
So, in this case, our validation question can thus be defined as follows:
Question: How can we validate that the WSN is accurately monitoring the forest fire
simulation?
The solution to this question lies in following the validation of the previous ecological
case study however we shall demonstrate here as to how VOMAS development can vary
- 224 -
from one case study to another even in closely related ABMs. We can note that in the pre-
vious scenario, we used the FWI to validate if the forest fire generated was “valid” by
comparing the FWI value with the status of the fire location. In this case, we need to re-
design the VOMAS to validate the sensing capability of the sensor node.
6.3.2.2 Software Contract
In this particular scenario, we can use the following Invariant Contract:
Invariant Contract: If the pre-condition that “sensors are correctly reading the values
from their neighborhood” is true, then the outcome of the FWI calculation by the sensors
would result in a post-condition of “correct prediction of fire in the vicinity of the sensor
node”.
6.3.2.3 VOMAS agent design
As noted in the generalized methodology, our next step is to decide upon the design of
the agents which will be used for performing the validation. In this case, since we want to
validate the effects of the sensor nodes, it makes sense to use some of the sensor nodes as
VOMAS agents and then use them to compare the validation criteria (FWI) with that of
their neighboring trees. Thus, if there is a fire in the neighborhood of a sensor node agent,
the sensor should predict fire based on the FWI value. The simulation results of this case
study will again be evaluated in the results section of the chapter.
6.3.3 Case Study III: Researcher Growth Simulation
While our first case study was from the domain of ecological Sciences and the second
was from telecommunications in particular, our third case study has been chosen from the
domain of Social Sciences. The goal of choosing different case studies is to be able to
show the generality of the proposed in-simulation validation methods by the use of
- 225 -
VOMAS. In this particular case study, our goal is to simulate the evolution of researchers
over time by means of an integration of ABM and Complex Network concepts.
To be specific, we start by an examination of the research process. The research process
can be considered in the light of two clear aspects. The first aspect is related to how re-
searchers perform research and get it published. The second aspect is the eventual complex
adaptive emergent effects of the popularity of specific researchers, publication Journals or
institutions over time. This particular aspect of research has previously been discussed and
evaluated empirically using case studies earlier in Chapter 3. Here we first examine the
first aspect of the publication and research-related processes.
6.3.3.1 Research Process I: Publication
A first examination of how researchers perform research can be observed in Figure 77.
Here the research workflow starts when a researcher or a group of researchers start work-
ing individually or collectively on one or more innovative ideas. The ideas are correlated
with existing literature to understand a feel of the state of the art. The researcher acquires
data, performs analysis and then subsequently attempts modeling/simulation and/or exper-
imentation in an iterative fashion striving to achieve successful results based on a research
success criteria. After apparent success, the researchers embark on the task of writing the
results in the form of a report. Once this article has been submitted for review, it is evalu-
ated by impartial and anonymous referees. The reviewers examine the report for
originality in terms of advancing the state of the art and subsequently submit their reviews
to the Editor. Eventually the referee report can result in either an acceptance for publication
or else a rejection by means of provision of a set of reviews offering guidance to the au-
thors. In the case of a rejection, the researcher is at least armed with these reviewer's
comments, so s/he can start to work again on the same project and perform more experi-
mentation, generate better results, and the process starts over again.
- 226 -
Figure 77: Research Process I: Generalized research publication Workflow
6.3.3.2 Research Process II: Citations
After a paper has been published and is available for citation by other researchers
by being listed in standard indices (such as the Google Scholar, Scopus or Thomson Reu-
- 227 -
ters), the next step in the publication life cycle is the process of citation. Citations are the
means by which the importance of a particular scientific article can be measured quantita-
tively. In other words, when other researchers read and consider a paper to be important,
they cite the paper in their own papers and the process continues. Interestingly this process
proceeds completely autonomously and thus cannot be strictly influenced by any single
entity. Eventually the citation process can, at times, result in a high prestige of a researcher.
This can be quantitatively measured by means of indices such as the h-Index. This meas-
urement was first proposed in 2005 by Hirsch [217]. In general, the impact of a scientist
can be measured by being highly cited by other authors. Egghe [218] presented a detailed
overview of the inter-relation of Hirsch with related indices. These indices have been con-
sidered as effective measures of a scientist’s impact or research productivity.
Hirsch index is formally defined as:
“A scientist has index h if h of his/her Np papers have at least h citations each, and the
other (Np - h) papers have no more than h citations each.”
So, as an example, suppose an author has 6 papers: 5 of them have 4 citations and the
sixth has 1 citation. Then h = 4. It is important to note here that the calculation of h-Index
is not simple. It involves several tasks which are performed behind the scenes. These in-
clude intelligent retrieval of information from some standard indexing source (such as
Google Scholar or SCI, SSCI or Scopus etc.) and then calculation of the index by measur-
ing the citations of each published paper. A well-known tool for the calculation of Hirsch
index used extensively by researchers is Ann Harzing’s “Publish or Perish” [219].
Earlier in Chapter 3, we examined the process of performing Scientometric analysis of
citation data in depth by means of case studies. We noted earlier that the process of per-
forming CNA involves pruning of nodes. However, while a standard network manipulation
practice, automatic pruning can result in the loss of important and, at times, central nodes
- 228 -
from the network inadvertently. Here the goal of this case study is to propose an agent-
based model for simulation of an alternative Complex Network Modeling approach. This
approach is the Temporal Citation Networks (TCN), which involves a two step process
from bi-graph based author-paper Complex Networks such as those studied earlier in
Chapter 3. The formal methodology of developing these TCNs as an experiment of the
VOMAS methodology is as follows:
- First step is the removal of paper to paper links in the network resulting in a great
reduction in the total number of links in the network.
- The second step is to visually align the network nodes in line with the h-index of
the researcher.
After application of the two steps, the resultant network representation is capable of rep-
resenting different features which were otherwise impossible to note earlier using only
author-paper complex networks. These can be clearly noted in Figure 78. Here blue nodes
represent the papers depicting the total number of citations inside the node. The black col-
ored nodes represent the researchers, which are aligned in the 2-D Euclidean plane with a
height equal to the h-Index of the researcher, scaled to the particular vertical dimension of
the viewing plane. Thus, the goal of the case study is to evaluate the use of TCN in repre-
senting researcher evolution over time (i.e. temporally).
6.3.3.3 Agent Description
The model contains two different types of agents i.e. the researcher agents and the re-
search paper agents. The researcher agents are developed to model the researchers. As
such, they contain two variables for state maintenance. The first of these is “num-papers”
representing the total papers for the researcher. The other variable “my-papers” is repre-
sentative of all the paper agents. In other words, this variable allows for an aggregation of
these agents.
- 229 -
On the other hand, the research paper agent has three different variables. The first varia-
ble is the “tend-to-be-cited” variable. This variable ranges from 0 to 1 and is useful for
simulation of random papers. The second variable is the “num-cites” which represents the
current number of citations of the paper. The third “my-res” stores a pointer to the re-
searcher, to which this paper belongs.
Figure 78: TCN with black nodes depicting researchers placed according to their Hirsch index and
blue nodes depicting individual research papers and citations
In TCN, each paper will be replicated for each author. In other words if a paper has been
co-authored by n authors, there will be n instances of the paper in the TCN. This allows for
a reduction in clutter as well as helps in a succinct visualization to allow focusing on the
evolution of the researchers.
6.3.3.4 Validation Question
In this case study, we shall examine two different validation questions:
- 231 -
Validation Question 1: If the ABM of the TCN is able to represent any number of re-
searchers, would the number of nodes in the TCN be similar to the value predicted earlier
empirically?
Validation Question 2: Is the Hirsch index calculation of the ABM correct in terms of
the actual data?
6.3.3.5 VOMAS agent design
Here, for the first validation question, we shall design VOMAS agents who create a set
of random researcher and paper agents to validate the representational capabilities of the
ABM. However, for the second research question, we need VOMAS agents which can take
in real researcher data and simulate agents based on the evolution of this particular re-
searcher. Thus we have the following software contracts:
Invariant I: If for any TCN, the pre-condition that “any random number of researchers
are correctly represented” is true, then the post-condition that “the total number of links
should be significantly lesser than the number of links in a author-paper network with the
same data” is also true.
Invariant II: If the pre-condition that “researcher evolution data is correctly represent-
ed in a TCN” is true, then the post-condition that “the height of each node should
correspond correctly to the Hirsch Index (h) of the researcher over time” should also be
true.
6.4 Results and Discussion
In the previous section, we developed three different case studies from multiple disci-
plines. Here our goal is to present the results of the experimentation involved in the
validation of the simulations. It is pertinent to note here that while we can perform consid-
- 230 -
erably more experimentation here similar to previously done in earlier chapters in each of
these case studies, we shall however only focus on verification and validation of the effects
of the case study to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed generalized methodolo-
gy. Our focus here will be on the different effects of the simulation execution as well as the
resultant effects on the VOMAS validation. Here, we shall demonstrate how VOMAS
based validation builds on empirical validation methods while adding value addition in the
form of being a customizable software engineering modeling scheme.
6.4.1 Case Study I
In our first case study, our goal was to simulate the forest and forest fire dynamics
in considerable details. As such, we developed a set of advanced ABMs which allowed for
evaluation of different aspects of the case study.
To perform the simulation experiments, we notice that for validation, we have to evalu-
ate the following invariant which was described in the previous section:
“If the pre-condition of a “tree is on fire” is true, then a post-condition of “FWI value
in the range of Fire Danger index” is true.”
Next we discuss first the simulation parameters followed by the results of simulation
experiments for proving the validity of this invariant.
6.4.1.1 Simulation Parameters
The experiments were conducted to empirically validate the increase of temperature as-
sociated with the forest fire spread. The simulation parameters are given below:
Number of VOMAS agents nv {50,100, 2000}
Forest density dtree {60%, 65%, 70%}
- 232 -
ave
Fire delay in terms of simulation days t fire {10, 30,180}
Normalized average fire growth rate (area per simulation hour):
dfspread
dt
= {0.001, 0.002,..., 0.9}
Tree re-growth rate (new trees per simulation day in forest) dnnew {0.001, 0.005, 0.01}
dt
Initial average temperature of forest t ( oC) {5,10, 20, 30, 40}
Average relative humidity (%) have {10%, 20%,..., 50%}
6.4.1.2 Validation discussion
The results of the first set of experiments can be seen in Figure 79a. Here, we note how
detected forest fires intensity increases with an increase in detected temperature. The se-
cond result in the Figure 79b depicts the effect of the probability of fire ignition with an
increase in the FFMC.
- 233 -
Figure 79: Relationship between (a) Fire Intensity and temperature, (b) Probability of
fire ignition and fire fuel moisture code
We also note the relationship between simulated FWI vs. the FFMC value as a means of
verification of the correct working of the model as given in Figure 80. By means of a real-
istic reflection of the relation of the different values, we can thus deduce that the FWI
calculations are realistic and working.
- 234 -
Figure 80: Relation of FFMC with an increase in FWI
The table for testing the invariant is given in Table 22.
Table 22 Table of Fire Danger Index values
FWI value Fire risk
0-5 Low
5-10 Moderate
10-20 High
20-30 Very high
30+ Extreme
For validation of the invariant, the results were plotted as shown in Figure 81. As can be
noted, the randomly placed tree agents who are acting as VOMAS agents are successfully
able to detect the fire.
- 235 -
Figure 81: Tree VOMAS agents detecting fire vs. Fire area
In terms of the detected FWI in the case of fires, we can observe the detected behavior
in Figure 82. We can note here that the FWI value detected is with the fire danger as shown
earlier in the fire danger index table. Here, while the VOMAS agents are scattered
throughout the simulation environment, they are still able to detect the effects of the forest
fires of reasonable sizes.
Thus, we have noticed that by means of VOMAS, we have been able to perform valida-
tion of the case study model in addition to using empirical validation methods.
- 236 -
Figure 82: Maximum FWI detected by VOMAS tree agents plotted vs. the area of fires
6.4.2 Case Study II
In the previous case study, we validated the ecological simulation of forest fires. In the
second case study, our goal was to combine the earlier case study of fire simulation with a
multi-hop environmental monitoring WSN simulation developed as a QUDG as explained
earlier in the chapter.
We can recall here, the invariant which was designed for use in the validation of this
case study ABM. The invariant can be re-stated as follows:
If the pre-condition that “sensors are correctly reading the values from their neighbor-
hood” is true, then the outcome of the FWI calculation by the sensors would result in a
post-condition of “correct prediction of fire in the vicinity of the sensor node”.
- 237 -
ave
6.4.2.1 Simulation Parameters
Since this ABM is based on the previous ABM which was on ecological modeling of the
structural evolution of a forest, some of the parameters of the experiments are similar to the
previous case study. While others are new, being related to the sensor nodes as given be-
low:
Number of VOMAS agents nv {50,100, 2000}
Forest density dtree {60%, 65%, 70%}
Fire delay in terms of simulation days t fire {10, 30,180}
Normalized average fire growth rate (area per simulation hour):
dfspread
dt
= {0.001, 0.002,..., 0.9}
Tree re-growth rate (new trees per simulation day in forest) dnnew {0.001, 0.005, 0.01}
dt
Initial average temperature of forest t ( oC) {5,10, 20, 30, 40}
Average relative humidity (%) have {10%, 20%,..., 50%}
Number of sensor nodes nsensors {100, 200,..., 500}
Normalized distribution of sensors (in terms of sensors per square simulation area)
nsensor {0.0013, 0.026, 0.013} Asim
Maximum sensor communication radius max(Rcomm ) {20, 30, 40, 50}
Maximum sensor sensing radius in terms of simulation measure max(Rsens ) {2, 5, 7,10}
- 238 -
6.4.2.2 Validation discussion
Here, our basic simulation model can be viewed in Figure 83. As can be noted from the
simulation output, the sensors are all connected with each other however not every sensor
will be directly accessible from each other sensor using a single hop. Thus, the information
in this WSN needs to be aggregated and confirmed with local sensors before it is forward-
ed to the remote sink.
Figure 83: Basic simulation model of multi-hop WSN modeled as a QUDG monitoring forest
conditions
When the simulation is actually executed, each of the WSN nodes measure local param-
eters and display them as labels as can be noted in Figure 84. In this particular design, as
noted earlier, the number of sensors is limited as compared with the number of tree nodes
in the case of environmental modeling; as such the calculation of FWI in these nodes peri-
odically (e.g. every 1000th tick) would not be a problem for simulation execution.
- 239 -
Figure 84: WSN monitoring the local environment displaying measured parmeters
The structure of the forest as well as the weather evolves over time with fires, snowfall
and rainfall occurring at random instances. The result of a simulation where the fire has
caused an impact on a major section of the forest monitored using the WSN can be ob-
served next in Figure 85. Here, we can also note that one of the center nodes demonstrates
the fire was very recent. This phenomenon can be noted visually by means of observing the
changing of color of the appropriate WSN node to yellow.
- 241 -
Figure 85: Wireless Sensors recording forest temperature and calculating FWI
Different simulation parameters added to the simulation model can now be seen in the
configuration panel shown in Figure 86.
- 240 -
Figure 86: Configuration Options of simulation models of combining Forest Fire simulations with
monitoring simulation by a WSN
A detailed view of the simulation of several fires in a forest with observed FWI values
is given.
Figure 87: Effects of monitoring large set of fires and FWI value
- 242 -
As we can see in Figure 87, the temperature as well as the observed FWI values exhibit
similar variations. In addition, we note that the observed value of FWI greater than 20 is
demonstrating the effects of the forest fires correctly validating the ability to monitor forest
fires using the sensors.
For a formal validation of the fire detection invariant, we plot the earliest time of fire
detection vs. the average distance of forest fires as shown in Figure 88.
Figure 88 :Earliest detection of FWI spike vs. average distance of sensors from fire incident
Here we can clearly note that using the linear interpolation line, the detection fol-
lows a trend line of y = 0.911x + 0.317 with a reasonable R-squared value of R2 = 0.572 .
Here the fact that this value is greater than 0 demonstrates the possibility of prediction of
one value based on the other value (in linear regression).
- 243 -
Thus, in this case study, we have again demonstrated the effectiveness of using
VOMAS to verify and validate the simulation model using the invariant contract. In this
particular case, again, our validation was coupled with existing model validation tech-
niques of empirical validation and cross-model validation using multiple cooperative
agents in the same simulation model.
6.4.3 Case Study III
While the previous two case studies were from ecological modeling and telecommuni-
cations respectively, our third case study, which was developed in the chapter previously is
from Social Sciences and the two invariant contracts for this case study can be stated as
follows:
Invariant I: If for any TCN, the pre-condition that “any random number of researchers
are correctly represented” is true, then the post-condition that “the total number of links
should be significantly lesser than the number of links in a author-paper network with the
same data” is also true.
Invariant II: If the pre-condition that “researcher evolution data is correctly represent-
ed in a TCN” is true, then the post-condition that “the height of each node should
correspond correctly to the Hirsch Index (h) of the researcher over time” should also be
true.
6.4.3.1 Simulation parameters
In this case study, the way to understand the experimental results is that for validation of
the hypotheses, we have developed essentially two different types of validation VOMAS
mechanisms inside the same ABM. The first validation VOMAS is specifically for the first
invariant allowing for the creation of a random number of researchers using VOMAS
- 244 -
agents based on the TCN hypothesis based complex network model. The second validation
VOMAS demonstrates the validation of the second invariant by allowing for the mapping
and loading of actual Hirsch index data and demonstrating the evolution of a well-known
researcher. The simulation parameters of the two validation simulation experiments are ex-
plained below:
Number of researcher nodes nres {10, 20,...,100}
Maximum number of initial papers per researcher max(npapers ) {10, 20,...40}
Average tendency to be cited is a probability which is a uniform ran-
dom, Pcited = rnd (0,100)
6.4.3.2 Validation of the representational abilities of TCN models
Researchers are each placed on the Cartesian coordinate system, based on their Hirsch
index. Each researcher, shown in black, has two labels. The first label shows the total
number of published papers and the second shows the Hirsch index. Each paper, shown in
blue, has the total citations as a label. This experiment validates the representational ability
of the TCN modeling paradigm for researchers as shown in Figure 89. Notice that this val-
idates the first invariant since we have demonstrated the capability of representation of any
number of researchers on the basis of TCN model in simulations.
Figure 89 :Simulation view of n = 60 random researchers with max-init-papers = 10
- 245 -
6.4.3.3 Validation of Hirsch Index Calculation
For the validation of the second invariant, we shall use concepts from empirical valida-
tion by means of calculating evolution of actual Hirsch index values for a renowned
researcher in the domain of multiagent systems. The chosen researcher was Prof. Victor
Lesser because of his relatively high h-Index as noted in various citation indices. Using
“Publish or Perish” software [220], the Google scholar citation index was queried. It was
discovered firstly that the index lists a total of 649 papers. However, 546 of these papers
have valid and properly indexed years which were therefore used in the subsequent valida-
tion exercises. The first indexed paper of the researcher is indexed from the year 1968. The
data for the next 20 years for “Victor Lesser” has been plotted in Figure 90.
Figure 90: h-Index plot for twenty years for “Victor Lesser” obtained using Publish or Perish program
Next, we simulate this using our ABM as shown in Figure 91a and b which show ten years
of evolution of h-Index of Victor Lesser as depicted using TCN by means of the sim-
ulated agent-based model. The detailed results and the retrieved data (via Google scholar
index) are depicted in the experiments are given in Table 23.
- 246 -
Figure 91: a, b Validation exercise 1: Evolution of a researcher’s Hirsch-index (Victor Lesser)
- 247 -
Table 23 Data for validation. Calc hI = Calculated h-Index and h-Index is the h-Index from Publish or
Perish software which obtains data via Google Scholar (Current as of July, 2011)
Year H-Index Citations of papers Calc hI
1968 1 6 1
1969 1 6 1
1970 2 [6 3] 2
1971 3 [20 6 3] 3
1972 3 [20 7 6 3] 3
1973 4 [20 7 6 6 3] 4
1974 4 [20 7 6 6 3 2 0] 4
1975 5 [166 20 7 6 6 3 3 2 0 0] 5
1976 6 [166 21 20 15 7 6 6 3 3 2 0 0] 6
1977
8
[166 122 103 71 21 20 15 8 7 6 6 3 3 2 0
0 0]
8
Table 23 shows two columns for the Hirsch index. One column shows the Hirsch index
calculated using Google Scholar and the Publish or Perish program. On the other hand, the
“Calc hI” column indicates the Hirsch index calculated by the algorithm alongside the evo-
lution of the researcher. The table also shows the number of cited papers per researcher.
Thus, we can see how we have validated both the calculation of the h-Index as well as the
effectiveness of TCNs for the modeling of researcher reputation (state) co-evolution with
the changes in the topology using our agent-based model.
In terms of the number of nodes required to be displayed in traditional author-paper ci-
tation networks versus TCNs, we can observe the results as shown in Figure 92.
- 248 -
Figure 92: Validation Exercise 2: Comparison of number of nodes needed to display a author-paper
citation network vs. a TCN for Victor Lesser’s papers.
Thus, by means of the proposed methodology, we have demonstrated how to verify and
validate the case study. Using two different invariants allowed us to demonstrate different
aspects from the earlier two case studies.
6.4.4 Critical comparison of VOMAS with other approaches
In the previous section, we have demonstrated the broad applicability of the proposed
in-simulation validation scheme for ABMs by application of the methods on three different
case studies from different scientific disciplines. In this section, we evaluate existing meth-
ods in contrast with our methodological approach and analyze how this validation scheme
fits in these methods prevalent in literature for the verification and validation of ABMs.
6.4.4.1 Empirical Validation
Empirical validation is concerned with using empirical data to validate the ABM. Dif-
ferent researchers such as Marks [221] and Fagiolo et al. [202] have proposed the use of
empirical validation of agent-based models. The proposed in-simulation validation meth-
odology builds on top of existing empirical validation techniques. It essentially allows for a
design of validation techniques using software engineering concepts. While it can still use
empirical validation subsequently or else perform conceptual validation depending upon
- 249 -
the particular type of simulation model or application case study (as has been shown earlier
in the case studies). Thus there is no conflict here with the original related empirical vali-
dation methodologies.
6.4.4.2 Validation using Companion Modeling Approach
In Social Sciences, there is an approach to agent-based modeling termed as the “Com-
panion Modeling Approach”. In companion modeling, the researcher or modeler are the
one and the same and they work together with stakeholders from the authorities to develop
models and results. By having stakeholders examine the implications, the models are in
essence “face” validated. The process has been generalized by Bousquet and Trébuil [222]
as shown in Figure 93. The idea is to go back and forth between different stakeholders and
the researchers where the stakeholders are the authorities governing the business-
es/economic ecosystems. However, this methodology does not differentiate between the
simulation specialists and end-user researchers in any way. As such, while end-user re-
searchers might be experts in their domain of modeling, they can be separate entities from
the actual teams who can better develop the simulation models. This is one way in which
how our proposed methodology can be considered to extend upon the “companion model-
ing” concept. In addition, our methodology brings in concepts from Software Engineering
and Artificial Intelligence.
Another way in which our proposed methodology is different is the use of descriptive
agent-based models (DREAM models as discussed in previous chapter) which are able to
describe ABMs across scientific disciplines. In the proposed companion modeling ap-
proach, the goal was to develop simulations with only stakeholders from the business
ecosystem modeling and not multidisciplinary validation. Still, in this way, the proposed
VOMAS-based approach extends this companion modeling set of concepts which were
- 251 -
designed for specific application case studies to generalized multidisciplinary approaches.
Again, this implies there is no direct conflict between the two approaches and VOMAS
intelligently uses and extends existing techniques.
Figure 93: Companion modeling cycle, figure credit: Bousquet and Trébuil [222]
6.5 Conclusions
In this chapter, we have presented the proposed in-simulation verification and validation
methodology of building customized VOMAS inside different ABMs. This validated
agent-based modeling level of the framework builds upon previous framework levels such
as exploratory agent-based modeling and descriptive agent-based modeling allowing for
validated agent-based modeling. As a means of unification of all ideas and concepts, the
methods and case studies extensively involve both the use of agent-based models and
complex network models and methods in different scientific disciplines. We presented
three different case studies from different scientific disciplines including ecological model-
ing, telecommunications and social sciences demonstrating the broad applicability of the
proposed methods involving building customized validation schemes based on the particu-
lar case study.
- 250 -
7 Conclusions and Future Work
This thesis represents first steps towards the solution of a set of nontrivial problems as-
sociated with the colossal task of developing a unified framework applicable to
multidisciplinary and inter-disciplinary cas research studies. We propose a combination of
agent-based modeling and complex network approaches, two paradigms which are preva-
lent in cas modeling literature but, to the best of our knowledge, have never previously
been combined in the form of a framework enabling comprehensive cas inter-/multi-
disciplinary research studies to be carried out based on expected goals and outcomes of the
studies.
In this chapter, we first give an overview of the thesis contributions. Next, we critically
evaluate the different framework levels and case studies in relation to other state-of-the-art
techniques prevalent in cas modeling literature. This is followed by details of the limita-
tions of our work and finally we propose how the different framework levels can be
utilized in other cas research case studies in addition to how our proposed framework lev-
els can be further enhanced by other researchers in long term studies.
7.1 Overview
To demonstrate the applicability and use of each of the different proposed framework
levels, we had to work in different scientific disciplines and nomenclatures. At times, we
had to work with domain experts from a variety of backgrounds to develop the different
case studies. The application case studies ranged from consumer electronics, agent-based
computing, complex adaptive communication networks, ecological modeling, scientomet-
rics and social sciences. While the framework levels propose a systematic set of ideas for
modeling and simulation of cas depending on the data types available and the case study
- 252 -
objectives, by no means do they reflect a comprehensive framework for modeling all pos-
sible types of cas, rather, as stated in the thesis objectives, our work represent a first step
towards realizing this ambitious goal.
7.2 Research Contributions
The unified framework proposed in this thesis is structured in the form of four different
levels based on objectives of the proposed research as well as availability of suitable data.
These levels use a combination of agent-based and complex network-based modeling ap-
proaches allowing multidisciplinary researchers to better conduct research by adopting a
suitable framework level for developing models for their particular case study. Each
framework level is substantiated by one or more complete example case studies as a means
of demonstration of the generalized applicability and usage.
7.2.1 Complex Network Modeling Level for Interaction data
In chapter 3, we proposed the complex network modeling level. This level is based on
the scenario where suitable data is some available, categorized and classified. This level is
more suitable for use in the case of highly standardized interaction data repositories. To
specifically show the broad applicability of the proposed framework level, a standard data
repository, the Thomson Reuters web of knowledge, was selected. The initial data retrieved
from this source was textual in nature with a large number of tags. Since only a few set of
tags were suitable for each type of complex network, these text files were first parsed and
then analyzed for tag selection. This was followed by the extraction of suitable complex
networks. Subsequently different complex network methods were employed to extract suit-
able quantitative and qualitative measures about these networks. These measures were used
to correlate the scientific implications of the research cas with the structural topological
features of each network. Using two separate case studies from two different scientific do-
- 253 -
mains of “Agent-based Computing” and “Consumer Electronics”, we demonstrated the
broad applicability of the complex networks modeling methods. This framework level also
serves as an encompassing level for existing complex network modeling case studies.
7.2.2 Exploratory agent-based modeling level
In chapter 4, we proposed the use of Agent-based Modeling to develop exploratory cas
studies. The idea of exploratory ABM is to allow researchers to focus specifically on
demonstrating the feasibility of their ABM design by means of developing proof of con-
cept models. Similar to the complex network modeling level, exploratory agent-based
modeling level is also an encompassing level and allows different existing agent-based
modeling literature to be classified under this level.
To demonstrate the broad applicability of the proposed modeling paradigm, we demon-
strated exploratory agent-based modeling in the domain of “Internet of Things”, a sub-area
of upcoming research area of Cyber-physical systems where household and commonly de-
vices can use communication networking to retrieve or expose useful information. The
case study was used as a proof-of-concept for the use of unstructured P2P search algo-
rithms in a completely different domain by demonstrating how static and mobile devices
can dynamically connect together to expose different types of content in their surround-
ings. In general, simulation results from the case study, demonstrated the effectiveness and
benefits of using the proposed exploratory agent-based modeling level for performing fea-
sibility studies and developing proof-of-concept models for aspects such as needed in e.g.
funding applications or for planning future research.
7.2.3 Descriptive agent-based modeling level
While exploratory ABM can be effective in conducting proof-of-concept feasibility
studies, occasionally the goal of modeling is to be able to explore the use of communica-
- 254 -
tion of models as a means of inter-disciplinary model comparison for knowledge transfer
and learning. Our proposed DescRiptivE Agent-based Modeling (DREAM) approach al-
lows for this type of modeling and simulation. The DREAM model consists of a
quantitative complex network model (i.e. a network model along with a quantitative “foot-
print” based on a centrality analysis of the network) coupled with a pseudocode-based
specification model. DREAM model allows for a high level of fidelity with the ABM using
a non-code modeling approach. Thus it allows for comparison of different models without
expecting end-user cas researchers to be able to program models. Researchers can develop
a DREAM model of their cas case study by extending the already-provided baseline com-
plex network model followed by performing a complex network analysis. DREAM models
also allow for a quantitative comparison of the centrality- based “footprint” of different
ABMs across application case studies in addition to a visual comparison of different mod-
els by means of the different complex networks. A case study example demonstrating the
use of DREAM in the domain of a heterogeneous ABM consisting of a well-studied
“boids” model of flocking coupled with a single-hop WSN model demonstrates the usage
of the descriptive agent-based modeling level. Simulation results obtained from the case
study experiments also indicated some interesting research outcomes in terms of how sens-
ing can be used to predict and detect group behavior in large and complex mobile agents
(such as persons in crowds or airplanes in the sky etc.).
7.2.4 Validated agent-based modeling level
The validated agent-based modeling level of the proposed framework is suitable for use
in research case studies where the validation of phenomena in the ABM is the central goal
of a particular case study. Using a combination of concepts from three different scientific
disciplines of multiagent systems, social sciences and software engineering, we propose
the use of a VOMAS approach which allows for both the segregation of roles of the Simu-
- 255 -
lation Specialists and the Subject Matter Experts in a team-oriented iterative methodology.
The goal of the VOMAS verification and validation approach is to allow cas researchers to
specify validation questions which are transformed to invariants based on pre-conditions
and post-conditions. These invariants are enforced in the ABM subsequently by custom-
ized VOMAS agents using an in-simulation validation scheme. For the validation and
demonstration of the proposed approach, three separate case studies encompassing ecolog-
ical modeling, WSN monitoring and social simulation of researchers in the form of a
Temporal Citation Network (TCN) were presented demonstrating the effectiveness and vi-
ability of the proposed validated agent-based modeling level.
7.3 Critical review of the proposed levels
The first two levels of the proposed framework can be considered as encompassing lev-
els since they allow the inclusion of existing cas literature under the proposed framework
guidelines. Thus complex network models in existing cas literature can be classified under
the complex network modeling level of the proposed framework as complex network mod-
els while existing agent-based models can be classified under the exploratory agent-based
modeling level. The rest of the two framework levels specifically propose descriptive and
validated Agent-based modeling respectively. Next, both these levels are critically com-
pared with existing methods in cas literature.
7.3.1 Critical Comparison of DREAM with other approaches
While, to the best of our knowledge, there is no other well-known approach in literature
which describes agent-based models descriptively and quantitatively similar to the pro-
posed DREAM approach as part of the descriptive agent-based modeling level, here we
review the DREAM approach to two somewhat related approaches of knowledge transfer
and description of agent-based models (discussed earlier in more details in chapter 5):
- 256 -
7.3.1.1 Template Software approach
The Santa Fe Institute proposes the use of template software approach[130] which es-
sentially entails using software code as a means of model comparison. However, while
useful, there are certain obvious limitations of this approach given as follows:
Firstly, software templates are code-based and while helpful (in line) comments can at
times augment the readability of code, the fact remains that code is always tied to a single
platforms and/or language. As such, this approach does not allow for either a non-code or a
quantitative/visual comparison of models as proposed in the descriptive agent-based mod-
eling level of the proposed framework.
Secondly, one key benefit of moving away from pure code –based approaches is the re-
duction of required programming-related learning curve for researchers to perform inter-
disciplinary model comparison without the requirement of a detailed programming
knowledge by means of visual or quantitative or pseudocode template based comparison.
7.3.1.2 ODD approach
A textual approach of describing ecological and individual-based (agent-based) models
has been proposed by Grimm et al. This approach is termed as the Overview, Design con-
cepts, and Details (ODD) protocol[199]. As compared with the proposed DREAM
modeling approach, there are certain key limitations of ODD given as follows:
Firstly, ODD is primarily textual description. A closer examination of the ODD ap-
proach reveals that it is basically a way of describing agent-based models using a proposed
checklist of headings. Secondly this approach does not allow for a quantitative comparison
such as possible by means of the use of complex network methods as described in the pro-
posed modeling methodology. Thirdly, ODD also does not offer any visualization-based
- 257 -
approach where researchers can visualize an entire ABM for comparison with another
ABM.
Another problem with the ODD approach is that it also does not offer a one-to-one
translation of models from the actual model to the source code. Finally, ODD also does not
allow for writing detailed technical descriptions of algorithms (since it is textual and does
not use pseudocode, flowcharts or UML etc. in any way to describe the algorithms). Thus
to summarize, while textual descriptions are effective in giving basic ideas about a model,
the proposed DREAM model based descriptive agent-based modeling level allows for a
number of other benefits as compared to the ODD approach.
7.3.2 Critical comparison of VOMAS with other approaches
Like the previous comparison of DREAM models, here we give the summary of a more
detailed comparison, given earlier in Chapter 6, of the proposed in-simulation validation
approach with other literature in the domain of verification and validation of ABMs.
7.3.2.1 Empirical Validation
Empirical validation is a technique used primarily in the domain of Agents in Computa-
tional Economics (ACE) and social sciences concerned with using empirical data to
validate ABM such as by Marks [221] and Fagiolo et al. [202]. While empirical validation
is an effective approach, it is not associated with a specific analysis and design approach
on how to structure the simulation study or how an agent-based model can be enhanced for
performing a systematic verification and validation. As such, the proposed in-simulation
validation methodology of the validated agent-based modeling level builds on top of these
empirical validation techniques. It essentially allows for the design of validation techniques
using software engineering concepts in addition to allowing for performing customized
conceptual validation of the case study.
- 258 -
7.3.2.2 Validation using Companion Modeling Approach
In Social Sciences, another approach to validation is termed as the “Companion Model-
ing Approach”. In the companion modeling approach, researchers work together with
stakeholders from higher authorities (in the case of Business ecosystems) to develop mod-
els and get approval of the results. In other words, by involving the stakeholders, the model
is essentially “face” validated as noted by Bousquet and Trébuil [222]. The idea is to go
back and forth between different stakeholders and the researchers where the stakeholders
are the authorities governing the businesses/economic ecosystems. However, this method-
ology does not differentiate between the simulation specialists and the end-user researchers
in any way. As such, while end-user researchers might be experts in their domain of model-
ing, they can be separate entities from the actual teams who might be actually developing
the simulation models. Secondly, the companion modeling approach does not allow for a
step-by-step team-oriented approach to validation. Thirdly this approach is limited to busi-
ness stakeholder and is domain specific.
Thus, the proposed in-simulation methodology can also be considered to extend existing
concepts from the “companion modeling” approach. In addition, the proposed methodolo-
gy utilizes concepts from Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence to form a
customizable approach to the in-simulation validation of Agent-based simulation models.
7.4 Limitation of the Methods
In the previous sections, we have given an outline of our key contributions in this thesis
followed by a critically comparison of the different framework levels with existing state-
of-the-art approaches in cas literature. Here, we give details of the limitations of the indi-
vidual framework levels as well as the limitations of case studies and the choice of the
selected ABM tool.
- 259 -
7.4.1 Limitations and proposed extensions of the framework levels
Here, we outline the limitations of the individual framework levels. Firstly, as men-
tioned earlier in this chapter, the complex network modeling and the exploratory agent-
based modeling levels are specifically designed for encompassing existing literature in cas
modeling. As such, they are purposefully designed to allow existing case studies from the
domains of complex network and agent-based modeling paradigms.
However, as noted in previous section, while ODD is a completely textual description,
none of the framework level currently tie in with the ODD model. As such, one possible
extension of the exploratory agent-based modeling level could thus be to tie in ODD with
the proposed descriptive agent-based modeling level.
For the VOMAS in-simulation modeling approach, while we have applied it to different
case studies, it has not been possible to apply and evaluate the approach to earlier business
ecosystem modeling domains, which use empirical validation and companion modeling
approaches. As such, a possible iterative improvement in this in-simulation modeling ap-
proach can be foreseen if the proposed approach were applied to case studies which have
previously been studied by researchers in the companion modeling and the empirical vali-
dation areas. This would thus validate the approach further and possibly evolve it further in
the directions of these previously well-studied approaches.
7.4.2 Selection of Case studies
Our first key limitation arises from the diversity of possible cas that exist in the real
world. While we have attempted to cover a large number of representative application case
studies, there are simply too many possible domains to be covered in a limited period of
time and are hence out of the scope of this thesis. Although we believe we have demon-
strated the methods in a number of key target sub-domains of cas such as social sciences,
- 261 -
ecological sciences as well as telecommunications, our selected case studies only reflect a
limited combination of cas. Thus, extensive further research and exploration of cas case
studies need to be performed to fully evaluate our proposed framework in other cas do-
mains.
7.4.3 Selection of Agent-based Modeling Tool
At several times during the research, other agent-based modeling tools were evaluated for
possible usage in the different case studies. These included Repast-S, Mason, Swarm,
Scratch and other toolkits, a good overview of which can be found in[141]. However, none
of these tools appeared to better suit the case studies in comparison with the NetLogo sim-
ulation tool. However, there are certain problems associated with NetLogo that limit its
usage in certain cases that can only be overcome by advanced programmers capable of de-
veloping widgets and extensions to extend NetLogo. Here, we list some of the observed
limitations:
A. NetLogo is based on primarily a single file structure. While other files can be im-
ported, it does not offer any proper reuse in the form of object oriented modules.
While NetLogo extensions can be built and compiled in Java, the Logo language it-
self requires code to be re-written or imported instead of being able to make classes
and objects for reuse.
B. While the new version (V4.1) of NetLogo allows multi-threaded execution of sever-
al experiments simultaneously, it does not directly allow for performing distributed
experiments on multiple machines. As a result, it is not very easy to execute large
scale realistic models, which might otherwise require resources offered only by a
cluster of machines.
- 260 -
C. One major problem with NetLogo is the lack of any strong debugging support. The
debugging primitives allowed by NetLogo are essentially the same as printing val-
ues, which was the norm in low-level languages such as Assembly and Machine
Languages. As such, on the one hand, while NetLogo offers excellent agent-based
modeling support, on the other, there is no way of either setting breakpoints or
watches as is the norm in most advanced Integrated Development Environments
(IDEs).
D. Finally, one other problem with NetLogo is that it does not differentiate between the
IDE and the runtime environment. As such, it is not possible to develop NetLogo
code in a separate IDE while running it in separate runtime.
7.5 Proposed Future directions
The framework and the example case studied allow for a number of possible usages in
further research studies. Some of these are given as possible future case studies as follows:
Specifically, at the complex network modeling level, the complex network approach can
be further applied to complex adaptive social and biological systems. These can include the
extraction and analysis of nucleic acid molecules secondary structures (from genomic da-
ta), analysis of social network structures and internet-scale communication networks.
In addition, the exploratory agent-based modeling level can be further applied in differ-
ent scientific disciplines such as in exploration of how complex networks can be used to
study the spread of HIV infections in sub-populations amongst other possible case studies.
In addition, the Cyber Physical Systems case study can be further enhanced by practically
implementing the study using mobile devices and performing comparative analysis of the
results obtained from the simulation study with results obtained from the physical devices.
- 262 -
The proposed descriptive agent-based modeling approach can be further applied to in-
ter-disciplinary case study applications. In addition, the results of sensing in complex
environments have numerous possible future applications. Examples of possible applica-
tions of sensing of flocking can include the following:
1. Sensing can be used for the identification of collective behavior of people using an
image processing or infrared approach. In other words, this technique can be used
to detect any group of people such as a group of “shoppers” flocking to a particular
set of shops in a mall even though there is a large crowd of thousands of other peo-
ple moving around.
2. This same approach can be used to detect a group of malicious attackers moving
through a crowd thus allowing for the detection of the group “flocking” without
cohering too much as that close grouping might have raised suspicions of the secu-
rity personnel.
3. Another application of this approach is in the domain of detecting a group of stealth
aircraft flocking towards a common mission. Stealth aircrafts are known to be in-
visible to radars in certain conditions. However these aircrafts are physically visible
to the naked eye or in the visible light. As such, while it is difficult to infer a coor-
dinated operation based on only the detection of a single aircraft, if there were a
randomly deployed group of sensors with appropriate cameras or other effective
sensing equipment pointing to the sky, these wirelessly connected sensors could po-
tentially detect a group of stealth aircraft flocking and moving towards a common
goal. Using simple shape detection image processing algorithms, each sensor can
simply note if a “large” object passes over them. And this detection of “proximity”
could be used to quantify flocking at a monitoring station collecting the data from
these sensors.
- 263 -
The validated agent-based modeling level of the framework can be used for validation
of any agent-based modeling case study. This is particularly useful in physical sciences
where validation of hypotheses can be crucial to the study. Possible future application case
studies can include the use of agent-based modeling for tumor growth analysis as well as
effects of treatment prediction, HIV spread modeling inside the patient’s body, use of ABM
to study fungal adsorption of metal ions, simulation study of correlation of Helicobacter
Pylori spread in patient’s gastrointestinal tract and others.
A general future research direction could take the form of development of software tools
and components for a possible unified framework. Thus researchers could implement the
framework levels in a single tool by, for example, embedding an agent-based modeling
tool such as NetLogo.
7.6 Final Words
To summarize, our framework design goals have been to develop a set of framework
levels allowing inter-disciplinary communication, collaboration and research by means of
combining complex network and agent-based modeling methods for multidisciplinary cas
researchers. While both complex network models as well as agent-based models have pre-
viously been used in different application cas studies, to the best of our knowledge, they
have not previously been combined together in the form of a single unified set of frame-
work guidelines. We have undertaken several successful case studies and reported results
across a range of selected domains, which demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed
framework. However, our work is still only a first step towards the formulation of the en-
visaged comprehensive unified framework for the modeling and simulation of cas. It is
hoped that continuing collaborative work in this domain would result in further enhance-
ment and applications of the proposed framework.
- 264 -
Appendix 1
Here we would like to mention the keywords used for searching the ISI web of
knowledge in addition to the reasoning behind the selection. Arguably there are numerous
ways to classify as sub-domain based on keywords. In this particular case, some of the
keywords were even shared with Chemical and Biological Journals (e.g. using the word
agent for e.g. Biological agent or Chemical agent even). As such, we had to limit the search
to papers with a focus on either agent-based modeling specifically or else in the domain of
multiagent systems.
The search was thus performed on titles and the exact search from the ISI web of
knowledge was as following:
Title=(agent-based OR individual-based OR multi-agent OR multiagent OR ABM*)
AND Title=(model* OR simulat*)
Timespan=All Years. Databases=SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI, CPCI-S.
Date retrieved: 8th September 2010 (1064 records)
- 265 -
References
[1]C. E. Van Wagner, “Development and structure of the Canadian forest fire weather
index system,” Forestry technical report, vol. 35, pp. 37, 1987.
[2]M. A. Niazi, and A. Hussain, “Social Network Analysis of trends in the consumer
electronics domain,” in Consumer Electronics (ICCE), 2011 IEEE International
Conference on, 2011, pp. 219-220.
[3]M. Niazi, and A. Hussain, “Agent-based computing from multi-agent systems to agent-
based models: a visual survey,” Scientometrics, pp. 1-21, 2011.
[4]M. A. Niazi, and A. Hussain, “Agent-based tools for modeling and simulation of self-
organization in peer-to-peer, ad hoc, and other complex networks,”
Communications Magazine, IEEE, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 166-173, 2009.
[5]M. A. Niazi, and A. Hussain, “Sensing Emergence in Complex Systems,” Sensors
Journal, IEEE, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 2479-2480, 2011.
[6]M. A. Niazi, and A. Hussain, “A Novel Agent-Based Simulation Framework for Sensing
in Complex Adaptive Environments,” Sensors Journal, IEEE, vol. 11, no. 2, pp.
404-412, 2011.
[7]M. Niazi, A. Hussain, A. R. Baig, and S. Bhatti, “Simulation of the research process,” in
40th Conference on Winter Simulation, Miami, FL, 2008, pp. 1326-1334.
[8]M. Niazi, Q. Siddique, A. Hussain, and M. Kolberg, “Verification and Validation of an
Agent-Based Forest Fire Simulation Model,” in SCS Spring Simulation
Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 2010, pp. 142-149.
[9]M. A. Niazi, A. Hussain, and M. Kolberg, “Verification &Validation of Agent Based
Simulations using the VOMAS (Virtual Overlay Multi-agent System) approach,” in
MAS&S 09 at Multi-Agent Logics, Languages, and Organisations Federated
Workshops, Torino, Italy, 2009, pp. 1-7.
[10]J. Holland, “Complex adaptive systems,” Daedalus, vol. 121, no. 1, pp. 17-30, 1992.
[11]C. Gershenson, and F. Heylighen, “When Can We Call a System Self-Organizing?,”
ECAL, vol. Volume 2801/2003, pp. 606-614, 2003.
[12]J. A. Pelesko, "Self assembly: the science of things that put themselves together,"
Chapman & Hall, 2007.
[13]F. Boschetti, and R. Gray, "A Turing Test for Emergence," Advances in Applied Self-
organizing Systems, Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing M.
Prokopenko, ed., pp. 349-364: Springer London, 2008.
[14]H. Kitano, “Systems biology: a brief overview,” Science, vol. 295, no. 5560, pp. 1662,
2002.
[15]F. Amadieu, C. Mariné, and C. Laimay, “The attention-guiding effect and cognitive
load in the comprehension of animations,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 27,
no. 1, pp. 36-40, 2011.
[16]J. Epstein, “Why model?,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol.
11, no. 4, pp. 12, 2008.
[17]M. Mitchell, "Complexity: a guided tour," Oxford University Press, USA, 2009.
[18]V. Grimm, and S. F. Railsback, "Individual-based Modeling and Ecology," Princeton
University Press, 2005.
[19]M. J. North, and C. M. Macal, "Managing business complexity: discovering strategic
solutions with agent-based modeling and simulation," Oxford University Press,
USA, 2007.
- 266 -
[20]N. Gilbert, and K. G. Troitzsch, "Simulation for the social Scientist," Second ed.:
McGraw Hill Education, 2005.
[21]P. L. Lollini, and F. P. Santo Motta, “Discovery of cancer vaccination protocols with a
genetic algorithm driving an agent based simulator,” BMC bioinformatics, vol. 7,
no. 1, pp. 352, 2006.
[22]C. Cioffi-Revilla, “Comparing Agent-Based Computational Simulation Models in
Cross-Cultural Research,” Cross-Cultural Research, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 208-230,
May 1, 2011, 2011.
[23]N. Boccara, "Modeling complex systems," Second ed.: Springer, 2010.
[24]L. A. N. Amaral, and J. M. Ottino, “Complex networks,” The European Physical
Journal B - Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 147-162,
2004.
[25]R. Axelrod, "The complexity of cooperation: agent-based models of competition and
colloboration.," Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997.
[26]M. E. J. Newman, “The Structure and Function of Complex Networks,” SIAM Review,
vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 167-256, 2003.
[27]U. Nations, Second generation surveillance for HIV: The next decade, HASP, Pakistan,
Islamabad, 2010.
[28]J. A. Bondy, and U. S. R. Murty, "Graph theory with applications," MacMillan, 1976.
[29]Author ed.^eds., “Analysis of biological networks,” John Wiley & Sons,, 2008, p.^pp.
Pages.
[30]W. d. Nooy, A. Mrvar, and V. Batagelj, "Exploratory Social Network Analysis With
Pajek," Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
[31]O. Balci, “Verification, validation, and accreditation,” in Proceedings of the 30th
conference on Winter simulation, Washington, D.C., United States, 1998.
[32]S. Forrest, and T. Jones, “Modeling complex adaptive systems with Echo,” Complex
systems: Mechanisms of adaptation, pp. 3–21, 1994.
[33]W. Wayne, “Cyber-physical Systems,” IEEE Computer, vol. 42, pp. 88-89, 2009.
[34]K. Ashton, “That Internet of Things Thing,” RFID Journal, 2009.
[35]J. H. Holland, "Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity," Basic Books, 1996.
[36]M. Girvan, and M. Newman, “Community structure in social and biological
networks,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, vol. 99, no. 12, pp. 7821, 2002.
[37]J. H. Miller, and S. E. Page, "Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to
Computational Models of Social Life," Princeton University Press, 2007.
[38]K. Kaneko, "Life: An introduction to complex systems biology," Springer Heidelberg,
Germany:, 2006.
[39]J. A. Thomson, J. Itskovitz-Eldor, S. S. Shapiro et al., “Embryonic stem cell lines
derived from human blastocysts,” Science, vol. 282, no. 5391, pp. 1145, 1998.
[40]K. Nair, "Tropical forest insect pests: ecology, impact, and management," Cambridge
Univ Pr, 2007.
[41]M. D. Lowman, “Leaf growth dynamics and herbivory in five species of Australian
rain-forest canopy trees,” Journal of Ecology, pp. 433-447, 1992.
[42]S. L. Lima, “Nonlethal effects in the ecology of predator-prey interactions,”
Bioscience, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 25-34, 1998.
[43]A. M. Hein, and J. F. Gillooly, “Predators, prey, and transient states in the assembly of
spatially structured communities,” Ecology, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 549-555, 2011.
[44]H. C. Berg, "E. coli in Motion," Springer Verlag, 2004.
[45]Y. Bar Yam, “A mathematical theory of strong emergence using multiscale variety,”
Complexity, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 15-24, 2004.
- 267 -
[46]L. Leydesdorff, "The challenge of scientometrics: The development, measurement, and
self-organization of scientific communications," Universal-Publishers, 2001.
[47]C. Chen, R. Paul, and B. O'Keefe, “Fitting the jigsaw of citation: Information
visualization in domain analysis,” Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 315-330, 2001.
[48]S. Card, J. Mackinlay, and B. Shneiderman, "Readings in information visualization:
using vision to think," Morgan Kaufmann, 1999.
[49]H. White, and K. McCain, “Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of
information science, 1972-1995,” Journal of the American Society for Information
Science, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 327-355, 1998.
[50]A. Pouris, and A. Pouris, “Scientometrics of a pandemic: HIV/AIDS research in South
Africa and the World,” Scientometrics, pp. 1-12, 2010.
[51]H. Hou, H. Kretschmer, and Z. Liu, “The structure of scientific collaboration networks
in Scientometrics,” Scientometrics, vol. 75, no. 2, pp. 189-202, 2008.
[52]M. Sierra-Flores, M. Guzmán, A. Raga, and I. Pérez, “The productivity of Mexican
astronomers in the field of outflows from young stars,” Scientometrics, vol. 81, no.
3, pp. 765-777, 2009.
[53]A. Barabási, H. Jeong, Z. Néda et al., “Evolution of the social network of scientific
collaborations,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 311, no.
3-4, pp. 590-614, 2002.
[54]R. Sooryamoorthy, “Scientific publications of engineers in South Africa, 1975–2005,”
Scientometrics, pp. 1-16, 2010.
[55]C. Chen, G. Panjwani, J. Proctor et al., “Visualizing the Evolution of HCI,” People and
Computers XIX—The Bigger Picture, pp. 233-250, 2006.
[56]E. Sandström, and U. Sandström, "CiteSpace Visualization of Proximity Clusters in
Dentistry Research." pp. 25–28.
[57]R. Zhao, and J. Wang, “Visualizing the research on pervasive and ubiquitous
computing,” Scientometrics, pp. 1-20, 2010.
[58]L. Chun-juan, C. Yue, and H. Hai-yan, “Scientometric & Visualization Analysis of
Innovation Studies International,” Technology and Innovation Management, vol. 1,
2010.
[59]H. White, and B. Griffith, “Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual
structure,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol. 32, no. 3,
pp. 163-171, 1981.
[60]H. D. White, and K. W. McCain, “Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation
analysis of information science, 1972–1995,” Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 327-355, 1998.
[61]H. Small, “Co citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship
between two documents,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science,
vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 265-269, 1973.
[62]H. Small, and B. Griffith, “The structure of scientific literatures I: Identifying and
graphing specialties,” Science studies, pp. 17-40, 1974.
[63]B. Griffith, H. Small, J. Stonehill, and S. Dey, “The structure of scientific literatures II:
Toward a macro-and microstructure for science,” Science studies, vol. 4, no. 4, pp.
339-365, 1974.
[64]H. Small, “Macro-level changes in the structure of co-citation clusters: 1983–1989,”
Scientometrics, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 5-20, 1993.
[65]E. Garfield, “Use of Journal Citation Reports and Journal Performance Indicators in
measuring short and long term journal impact,” Croatian medical journal, vol. 41,
no. 4, pp. 368-374, 2000.
- 268 -
[66]M. Amin, and M. Mabe, “Impact factors: use and abuse,” Medicina [Buenos Aires],
vol. 63, pp. 347-354, 2003.
[67]T. Braun, I. Dióspatonyi, S. Zsindely, and E. Zádor, “Gatekeeper index versus impact
factor of science journals,” Scientometrics, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 541-543, 2007.
[68]A. Fersht, “The most influential journals: Impact Factor and Eigenfactor,” Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 106, no. 17, pp. 6883, 2009.
[69]E. Garfield, “The history and meaning of the journal impact factor,” Jama, vol. 295,
no. 1, pp. 90, 2006.
[70]H. Moed, T. Van Leeuwen, and J. Reedijk, “A critical analysis of the journal impact
factors of Angewandte Chemie and the journal of the American Chemical Society
inaccuracies in published impact factors based on overall citations only,”
Scientometrics, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 105-116, 1996.
[71]M. Niazi, H. F. Ahmed, and A. Ali, “Introducing fault-tolerance and responsiveness in
web applications using SREFTIA,” in
Proceedings of the International Multiconference on
Computer Science and Information Technology, Wisla, Poland, 2006, pp. 271-278.
[72]H. S. Gunawi, T. Do, J. M. Hellerstein et al., Failure as a Service (FaaS): A Cloud
Service for Large-Scale, Online Failure Drills, University of California, Berkeley,
Berkeley, 2011.
[73]F. Dressler, "Self-Organization in Sensor and Actor Networks," Wiley, 2007.
[74]B. Cohen, "Incentives build robustness in BitTorrent." pp. 68–72.
[75]C. W. Reynolds, “Flocks, herds and schools: A distributed behavioral model,” in
Proceedings of the 14th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive
techniques, 1987, pp. 25-34.
[76]E. Fischbein, M. Deri, M. S. Nello, and M. S. Marino, “The role of implicit models in
solving verbal problems in multiplication and division,” Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 3-17, 1985.
[77]Z. N. O. Albert Laszlo Barabasi, “Network Biology: Understanding the cell's
functional organization,” Nature Reviews, vol. 5, pp. 101-114, 2004.
[78]V. Batagelj, “Efficient algorithms for citation network analysis,” Arxiv preprint
cs/0309023, 2003.
[79]K. Thulasiraman, and M. N. S. Swamy, "Graphs: theory and algorithms," Wiley
Online Library, 1992.
[80]P. Erdős, and A. Rényi, “On the evolution of random graphs,” Magyar Tud. Akad. Mat.
Kutató Int. Közl., vol. 5, pp. 17–61, 1960.
[81]D. J. Watts, and S. H. Strogatz, “Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’networks,”
Nature, vol. 393, no. 6684, pp. 440-442, 1998.
[82]A. L. Barabási, and R. Albert, “Emergence of scaling in random networks,” Science,
vol. 286, no. 5439, pp. 509, 1999.
[83]F. M. Hulett, “The signal transduction network for Pho regulation in Bacillus subtilis,”
Molecular microbiology, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 933-939, 1996.
[84]E. H. Davidson, "The regulatory genome: gene regulatory networks in development
and evolution," Academic Press, 2006.
[85]E. H. Davidson, “Emerging properties of animal gene regulatory networks,” Nature,
vol. 468, no. 7326, pp. 911-920, 2010.
[86]Z. N. Oltvai, and A. L. Barabási, “Life's complexity pyramid,” Science, vol. 298, no.
5594, pp. 763, 2002.
[87]N. Team, "Network Workbench Tool," Indiana University, Northeastern University,
and University of Michigan, 2006.
- 269 -
[88]V. Batagelj, and A. Mrvar, “Pajek-program for large network analysis,” Connections,
vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 47-57, 1998.
[89]C. Chen, “CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient
patterns in scientific literature,” Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 359-377, 2006.
[90]P. Shannon, A. Markiel, O. Ozier et al., “Cytoscape: a software environment for
integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks,” Genome research, vol.
13, no. 11, pp. 2498, 2003.
[91]M. Baur, M. Benkert, U. Brandes et al., "Visone Software for visual social network
analysis." pp. 554-557.
[92]M. Wooldridge, “Agent-based computing,” Interoperable Communication Networks,
vol. 1, pp. 71-98, 1998.
[93]N. Jennings, “Agent-based computing: Promise and perils,” in 16th Int. Joint Conf. on
Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-99), Stockholm, Sweden, 1999, pp. 1429-1436.
[94]S. R. a. P. Norvig, "Artificial Intelligence A Modern Approach," Second ed.: Prentice
Hall, 2003.
[95]L. Panait, and S. Luke, “Cooperative multi-agent learning: The state of the art,”
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 387-434, 2005.
[96]H. James, “Where Are All the Intelligent Agents?,” vol. 22, pp. 2-3, 2007.
[97]T. Finin, R. Fritzson, D. McKay, and R. McEntire, "KQML as an agent communication
language." p. 463.
[98]J. Hendler, and D. McGuinness, “The DARPA agent markup language,” IEEE
Intelligent Systems, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 67-73, 2000.
[99]D. Connolly, F. van Harmelen, I. Horrocks et al., “Daml+ oil (march 2001) reference
description, December 2001,” Internetquelle: http://www. w3. org/TR/daml+ oil-
reference, heruntergeladen am, vol. 5, 2007.
[100]V. Quera, F. S. Beltran, and R. Dolado, “Flocking Behaviour: Agent-Based
Simulation and Hierarchical Leadership,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social
Simulation, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 8, 2010.
[101]V. Grimm, U. Berger, F. Bastiansen et al., “A standard protocol for describing
individual-based and agent-based models,” Ecological Modelling, vol. 198, no. 1-2,
pp. 115-126, 2006.
[102]S. F. Railsback, and V. Grimm, "Agent-based and Individual-based Modeling: A
Practical Introduction," Princeton University Press, 2011.
[103]S. C. Bankes, "Agent-based modeling: A revolution?," 90003, National Acad
Sciences, 2002, pp. 7199-7200.
[104]E. Bonabeau, “Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human
systems,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, vol. 99, no. Suppl 3, pp. 7280, 2002.
[105]H. Devillers, J. R. Lobry, and F. Menu, “An agent-based model for predicting the
prevalence of Trypanosoma cruzi I and II in their host and vector populations,”
Journal of Theoretical Biology, vol. 255, no. 3, pp. 307-315, 2008.
[106]G. M. Dancik, D. E. Jones, and K. S. Dorman, “Parameter estimation and sensitivity
analysis in an agent-based model of Leishmania major infection,” J Theor Biol, vol.
262, no. 3, pp. 398-412, Feb 7, 2010.
[107]V. A. Folcik, G. C. An, and C. G. Orosz, “The Basic Immune Simulator: an agent-
based model to study the interactions between innate and adaptive immunity,”
Theor Biol Med Model, vol. 4, pp. 39, 2007.
[108]V. Galvao, and J. G. Miranda, “A three-dimensional multi-agent-based model for the
evolution of Chagas' disease,” Biosystems, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 225-30, Jun, 2010.
- 271 -
[109]V. Galvao, J. G. Miranda, and R. Ribeiro-dos-Santos, “Development of a two-
dimensional agent-based model for chronic chagasic cardiomyopathy after stem
cell transplantation,” Bioinformatics, vol. 24, no. 18, pp. 2051-6, Sep 15, 2008.
[110]Z. Guo, P. M. A. Sloot, and J. C. Tay, “A hybrid agent-based approach for modeling
microbiological systems,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, vol. 255, no. 2, pp. 163-
175, 2008.
[111]C. F. Huang, J. Kaur, A. Maguitman, and L. M. Rocha, “Agent-based model of
genotype editing,” Evol Comput, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 253-89, Fall, 2007.
[112]J. Itakura, M. Kurosaki, Y. Itakura et al., “Reproducibility and usability of chronic
virus infection model using agent-based simulation; comparing with a
mathematical model,” Biosystems, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 70-8, Jan, 2010.
[113]M. Kiran, S. Coakley, N. Walkinshaw, P. McMinn, and M. Holcombe, “Validation
and discovery from computational biology models,” Biosystems, vol. 93, no. 1-2,
pp. 141-150, 2008.
[114]B. J. Lao, and D. T. Kamei, “Investigation of cellular movement in the prostate
epithelium using an agent-based model,” J Theor Biol, vol. 250, no. 4, pp. 642-54,
Feb 21, 2008.
[115]A. M. Bailey, M. B. Lawrence, H. Shang, A. J. Katz, and S. M. Peirce, “Agent-based
model of therapeutic adipose-derived stromal cell trafficking during ischemia
predicts ability to roll on P-selectin,” PLoS Comput Biol, vol. 5, no. 2, pp.
e1000294, Feb, 2009.
[116]C. Carpenter, and L. Sattenspiel, “The design and use of an agent-based model to
simulate the 1918 influenza epidemic at Norway House, Manitoba,” Am J Hum
Biol, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 290-300, May-Jun, 2009.
[117]M. A. Rubin, J. Mayer, T. Greene et al., “An agent-based model for evaluating
surveillance methods for catheter-related bloodstream infection,” AMIA Annu Symp
Proc, pp. 631-5, 2008.
[118]G. M. Odell, and V. E. Foe, “An agent-based model contrasts opposite effects of
dynamic and stable microtubules on cleavage furrow positioning,” J Cell Biol, vol.
183, no. 3, pp. 471-83, Nov 3, 2008.
[119]E. J. Robinson, F. L. Ratnieks, and M. Holcombe, “An agent-based model to
investigate the roles of attractive and repellent pheromones in ant decision making
during foraging,” J Theor Biol, vol. 255, no. 2, pp. 250-8, Nov 21, 2008.
[120]D. Santoni, M. Pedicini, and F. Castiglione, “Implementation of a regulatory gene
network to simulate the TH1/2 differentiation in an agent-based model of
hypersensitivity reactions,” Bioinformatics, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 1374-80, Jun 1,
2008.
[121]M. Batty, "Cities and complexity: understanding cities with cellular automata, agent-
based models, and fractals," The MIT press, 2007.
[122]X. Chen, and F. Zhan, “Agent-based modelling and simulation of urban evacuation:
relative effectiveness of simultaneous and staged evacuation strategies,” Journal of
the Operational Research Society, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 25-33, 2008.
[123]R. E. Streit, and D. Borenstein, “An agent-based simulation model for analyzing the
governance of the Brazilian Financial System,” Expert Systems with Applications,
vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 11489-11501, 2009.
[124]M. H. F. Zarandi, M. Pourakbar, and I. B. Turksen, “A Fuzzy agent-based model for
reduction of bullwhip effect in supply chain systems,” Expert Systems with
Applications, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1680-1691, 2008.
- 270 -
[125]T. Galla, “Independence and interdependence in the nest-site choice by honeybee
swarms: Agent-based models, analytical approaches and pattern formation,”
Journal of Theoretical Biology, vol. 262, no. 1, pp. 186-196, 2010.
[126]C. Gershenson, “Self-organizing traffic lights,” Arxiv preprint nlin/0411066, 2004.
[127]T. Carmichael, “Complex adaptive systems and the threshold effect: Towards a
general tool for studying dynamic phenomena across diverse domains,” THE
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE.
[128]U. Wilensky, “NetLogo,” Center for Connected Learning Comp.-Based Modeling,
Northwestern University, vol. Evanston, IL, 1999.
[129]M. Resnick, "StarLogo: an environment for decentralized modeling and decentralized
thinking." pp. 11-12.
[130]S. W. Pages. "Code Templates for Agent-based Models," August, 2011;
http://www.swarm.org/index.php/Software_templates.
[131]J. M. Vidal, P. Buhler, and H. Goradia, “The Past and Future of Multiagent Systems,”
AAMAS Workshop on Teaching Multi-Agent Systems, 2004.
[132]J. McCarthy, "LISP 1.5 programmer's manual," 1965.
[133]J. Banks, J. S. C. II, B. L. Nelson, and D. M. Nicol, "Discrete-Event System
Simulation," Fourth ed.: Peason Education, 2005.
[134]A. M. Law, “How to build valid and credible simulation models,” in Winter
Simulation Conference Miami, FL, 2008, pp. 39-47.
[135]T. H. Naylor, and J. M. Finger, “Verification of Computer Simulation Models,”
Management Science, vol. 2, pp. B92-B101, 1967.
[136]J. M. Galán, L. R. Izquierdo, S. S. Izquierdo et al., “Errors and Artefacts in Agent-
Based Modelling,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12,
no. 11, 2009.
[137]T. W. Lucas, S. M. Sanchez, F. Martinez, L. R. Sickinger, and J. W. Roginski,
“Defense and homeland security applications of multi-agent simulations,” in
Proceedings of the 39th conference on Winter simulation: 40 years! The best is yet
to come, Washington D.C., 2007.
[138]C. Bianchi, P. Cirillo, M. Gallegati, and P. A. Vagliasindi, “Validating and Calibrating
Agent-Based Models: A Case Study,” Comput. Econ., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 245-264,
2007.
[139]J. S. Hodges, and J. A. Dewar, Is It You or Your Model Talking? A Framework for
Model Validation, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California.
[140]G. Fagiolo, C. Birchenhall, and P. Windrum, “Empirical Validation in Agent-based
Models: Introduction to the Special Issue ” Computational Economics, vol. 30, no.
3, pp. 189-194, October, 2007, 2007.
[141]C. M. Macal, and M. J. North, “Agent-based modeling and simulation: desktop
ABMS,” in Proceedings of the 39th conference on Winter simulation: 40 years! The
best is yet to come, Washington D.C., 2007.
[142]R. Axtell, “The emergence of firms in a population of agents: local increasing returns,
unstable Nash equilibria, and power law size distributions,” The Brookings
Institution CSED Working Paper, vol. 3, pp. 138, 2000.
[143]R. Axtell, J. Epstein, and H. Young, “The emergence of classes in a multiagent
bargaining model,” Social dynamics, pp. 191–211, 1999.
[144]S. Moss, “Alternative Approaches to the Empirical Validation of Agent-Based
Models,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 11, no. 15,
2008.
- 272 -
[145]U. Wilensky, and W. Rand, “Making Models Match: Replicating an Agent-Based
Model,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 2,
10/31, 2007.
[146]A. Schmid, “What is the Truth of Simulation?,” Journal of Artificial Societies and
Social Simulation, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 5, 10/31, 2005.
[147]O. Barreteau, and e. al., “Our Companion Modelling Approach ” Journal of Artificial
Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 6, no. 1, 2003.
[148]M. Makowsky, “An Agent-Based Model of Mortality Shocks, Intergenerational
Effects, and Urban Crime,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation,
vol. 9, No. 2, 2006.
[149]L. Cernuzzi, M. Cossentino, and F. Zambonelli, “Process models for agent-based
development,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 18, no. 2,
pp. 205-222, 2005.
[150]P. Garrido, M. Malumbres, and C. Calafate, "ns-2 vs. OPNET: a comparative study of
the IEEE 802.11 e technology on MANET environments." p. 37.
[151]A. Sobeih, W. Chen, J. Hou et al., "J-sim: A simulation environment for wireless
sensor networks." pp. 175-187.
[152]P. Levis, N. Lee, M. Welsh, and D. Culler, "TOSSIM: Accurate and scalable
simulation of entire TinyOS applications." pp. 126-137.
[153]S. Park, A. Savvides, and M. B. Srivastava, “SensorSim: a simulation framework for
sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 3rd ACM international workshop on
Modeling, analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile systems, Boston,
Massachusetts, United States, 2000, pp. 104-111.
[154]J. Polley, D. Blazakis, J. McGee et al., "Atemu: A fine-grained sensor network
simulator."
[155]I. Baumgart, B. Heep, and S. Krause, "OverSim: A flexible overlay network
simulation framework." pp. 79-84.
[156]A. Varga, “The OMNeT++ discrete event simulation system,” in Proceedings of the
European Simulation Multiconference ESM’2001 (2001), Prague, 2001, pp. 319–
324.
[157]M. Jelasity, A. Montresor, G. P. Jesi, and S. Voulgaris, "The Peersim simulator," 2008.
[158]F. Mondada, G. C. Pettinaro, A. Guignard et al., “SWARM-BOT: A new distributed
robotic concept,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 193-221, 2004.
[159]O. Michel, “WebotsTM: Professional Mobile Robot Simulation,” International
Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 39-42, 2004.
[160]E. Sahin, S. Girgin, L. Bay nd r, and A. E. Turgut, “Swarm robotics,” Swarm
Intelligence: Introduction and Applications, vol. 1, pp. 87, 2008.
[161]F. Bellifemine, A. Poggi, and G. Rimassa, “Developing multi-agent systems with
JADE,” Intelligent Agents VII Agent Theories Architectures and Languages, pp. 42-
47, 2001.
[162]M. Pullen, “The Network Workbench: network simulation software for academic
investigation of Internet concepts,” Computer Networks, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 365-
378, 2000.
[163]A. Barabasi, “The origin of bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics,” Nature, vol.
435, no. 7039, pp. 207-211, 2005.
[164]A. Barabási, and A. Gelman, “Bursts: The Hidden Pattern Behind Everything We
Do,” Physics Today, vol. 63, pp. 46, 2010.
[165]T. Reuters, “Web of science,” Online factsheet Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania (Available from:
- 273 -
www.thomsonreuters.com/content/PDF/scientific/Web_of_Science_factsheet.pdf ),
2008.
[166]R. Sedgewick, and M. Schidlowsky, "Algorithms in Java, Part 5: Graph Algorithms,"
Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. Boston, MA, USA, 2003.
[167]E. Adar, "Guess: a language and interface for graph exploration." p. 800.
[168]R. W. Keyes, “The evolution of digital electronics towards VLSI,” Solid-State
Circuits, IEEE Journal of, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 193-201, 1979.
[169]S. Gamm, and R. Haeb-Umbach, “User interface design of voice controlled consumer
electronics,” Philips Journal of Research, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 439-454, 1995.
[170]J. F. Christensen, M. H. Olesen, and J. S. Kjær, “The industrial dynamics of Open
Innovation--Evidence from the transformation of consumer electronics,” Research
Policy, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 1533-1549, 2005.
[171]R. S. Rosenbloom, and W. J. Abernathy, “The climate for innovation in industry : The
role of management attitudes and practices in consumer electronics,” Research
Policy, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 209-225, 1982.
[172]R. Hisano, and T. Mizuno, “Sales distribution of consumer electronics,” Physica A:
Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 390, no. 2, pp. 309-318, 2011.
[173]S. F. Railsback, S. L. Lytinen, and S. K. Jackson, “Agent-based simulation platforms:
Review and development recommendations,” SIMULATION, vol. 82, no. 9, pp.
609, 2006.
[174]N. Gershenfeld, R. Krikorian, and D. Cohen, “The Internet of Things,” Scientific
American, vol. 291, no. 4, pp. 76-81, 2004.
[175]R. Groenevelt, E. Altman, and P. Nain, “Relaying in mobile ad hoc networks: the
Brownian motion mobility model,” Wireless Networks, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 561-571,
2006.
[176]M. C. Gonzalez, C. A. Hidalgo, and A. L. Barabási, “Understanding individual
human mobility patterns,” Nature, vol. 453, no. 7196, pp. 779-782, 2008.
[177]U. Wilensky. "NetLogo Users Discussion Group," August, 2011;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/netlogo-users/.
[178]U. Wilensky. "NetLogo Educators Mailing List," August, 2011;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/netlogo-educators/.
[179]D. L. Parnas, "Precise Documentation: The Key to Better Software," The Future of
Software Engineering, S. Nanz, ed., pp. 125-148: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.
[180]Y. Li, "Reengineering a scientific software and lessons learned." pp. 41-45.
[181]C. M. Macal, and M. North. "Repast Interest users Mailing List," August, 2011;
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/repast-interest.
[182]A. I. Concepcion, “DEVS Formalism: A Framework for Hierarchical Model
Development,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 14, pp. 228-241,
1988.
[183]B. P. Zeigler, “Multifaceted modeling methodology: Grappling with the irreducible
complexity of systems,” Behavioral Science, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 169-178, 2007.
[184]T. Buzan, and B. Buzan, "The mind map book," Pearson Education, 2006.
[185]A. Robins, J. Rountree, and N. Rountree, “Learning and teaching programming: A
review and discussion,” Computer Science Education, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 137-172,
2003.
[186]J. C. Reynolds, "The essence of Algol." pp. 67-88.
[187]U. Wilensky, "NetLogo Flocking Model," Center for Connected Learning and
Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, 1998.
[188]A. Boukerche, "Algorithms and protocols for wireless sensor networks," Wiley-IEEE
press, 2009.
- 274 -
[189]G. Anastasi, M. Conti, M. Di Francesco, and A. Passarella, “Energy conservation in
wireless sensor networks: A survey,” Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 537-568,
2009.
[190]J. Zheng, and A. Jamalipour, "Wireless Sensor Networks: A Networking Perspective,"
Wiley-IEEE Press, 2009.
[191]J. N. Al-Karaki, R. Ul-Mustafa, and A. E. Kamal, “Data aggregation and routing in
Wireless Sensor Networks: Optimal and heuristic algorithms,” Computer Networks,
vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 945-960, 2009.
[192]M. Younis, and K. Akkaya, “Strategies and techniques for node placement in wireless
sensor networks: A survey,” Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 621-655, 2008.
[193]J. M. Kahn, R. H. Katz, and K. S. J. Pister, "Next century challenges: mobile
networking for “Smart Dust”." pp. 271-278.
[194]C. Colombo, and C. Mcinnes, “Orbital dynamics of 'smart dust' devices with solar
radiation pressure and drag,” Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, 2011.
[195]W. Kim, K. Mechitov, J. Y. Choi, and S. Ham, "On target tracking with binary
proximity sensors." pp. 301-308.
[196]A. S. Rao, and M. P. Georgeff, “BDI agents: From theory to practice,” in First
International Conference on Multiagent Systems, San Francisco, 1995, pp. 312–
319.
[197]R. Cappelli, M. Ferrara, and D. Maltoni, “Fingerprint Indexing Based on Minutia
Cylinder-Code,” Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on,
no. 99, pp. 1-1, 2011.
[198]L. C. Freeman, “A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness,” Sociometry,
pp. 35-41, 1977.
[199]V. Grimm, U. Berger, D. L. DeAngelis et al., “The ODD protocol: A review and first
update,” Ecological Modelling, vol. 221, no. 23, pp. 2760-2768, 2010.
[200]B. Edmonds, and D. Hales, “Replication, replication and replication: Some hard
lessons from model alignment,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social
Simulation, vol. 6, no. 4, 2003.
[201]R. Axelrod, and W. D. Hamilton, “The evolution of cooperation,” Science, vol. 211,
no. 4489, pp. 1390, 1981.
[202]G. Fagiolo, A. Moneta, and P. Windrum, “A Critical Guide to Empirical Validation of
Agent-Based Models in Economics: Methodologies, Procedures, and Open
Problems,” Computational Economics, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 195-226, 2007.
[203]R. G. Sargent, “Verification and validation of simulation models,” in Proceedings of
the 40th Conference on Winter Simulation, Miami, Florida, 2008, pp. 157-169.
[204]F. P. Brooks, "The mythical man-month," Addison-Welsley, 1995.
[205]Y. Le Traon, B. Baudry, and J. M. Jezequel, “Design by Contract to Improve Software
Vigilance,” Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 571-
586, 2006.
[206]J. M. Jazequel, and B. Meyer, “Design by contract: the lessons of Ariane,” Computer,
vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 129-130, 1997.
[207]U. Wilensky, "NetLogo Fire model," Center for Connected Learning and Computer-
Based Modeling, Northwestern University 1997.
[208]A. Alexandridis, D. Vakalis, C. I. Siettos, and G. V. Bafas, “A cellular automata model
for forest fire spread prediction: The case of the wildfire that swept through Spetses
Island,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 204, no. 1, pp. 191-201, 2008.
[209]R. Axtell, R. Axelrod, J. M. Epstein, and M. D. Cohen, “Aligning simulation models:
A case study and results,” Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory,
vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 123-141, 1996.
- 275 -
[210]B. Lawson, P. F. R. Centre, and J. Turner, "Weather in the Canadian Forest Fire
Danger Rating System: a user guide to national standards and practices,"
Canadian Forestry Service, 1978.
[211]C. E. Van Wagner, "Structure of the Canadian forest fire weather index," Environment
Canada, Forestry Service, 1974.
[212]B. J. Stocks, T. J. Lynham, B. D. Lawson et al., “The Canadian Forest Fire Danger
Rating System: An Overview,” The Forestry Chronicle, vol. 65, no. 6, pp. 450-457,
1989.
[213]W. J. de Groot, “Interpreting the Canadian Forest fire Weather Index (FWI) System,”
In proc of the fourth Central Region Fire Weather Index Committee Scientific and
technical Seminar, Edmonton Canada, 1998.
[214]B. N. Clark, C. J. Colbourn, and D. S. Johnson, “Unit disk graphs,” Discrete
mathematics, vol. 86, no. 1-3, pp. 165-177, 1990.
[215]Y. Wang, “Topology control for wireless sensor networks,” Wireless Sensor Networks
and Applications, pp. 113-147, 2008.
[216]F. Kuhn, R. Wattenhofer, and A. Zollinger, “Ad hoc networks beyond unit disk
graphs,” Wireless Networks, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 715-729, 2008.
[217]J. Hirsch, “An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output,”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 102, no. 46, pp. 16569,
2005.
[218]L. Egghe, “The Hirsch-index and related impact measures,” Annual Review of
Information Science and Technology, vol. 44, pp. 65-114, 2010.
[219]A. Harzing, and R. van der Wai, “Google Scholar as a new source for citation
analysis,” Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics(ESEP), vol. 8, no. 1, pp.
61-73, 2008.
[220]A. Harzing, and R. van der Wal, “A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An
alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business,” Journal
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 60, no. 1, pp.
41-46, 2009.
[221]R. Marks, “Validating Simulation Models: A General Framework and Four Applied
Examples,” Computational Economics, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 265-290, 2007.
[222]F. Bousquet, and G. Trébuil, “Introduction to companion modeling and multi-agent
systems for integrated natural resource management in Asia,” Companion Modeling
and Multi-Agent Systems for Integrated Natural Resource Management in Asia, pp.
1-20, 2005.